Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24847437›Full record

ReviewAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2014

The use of surveillance and preventative measures for methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus infections in surgical patients.

Kevin T Kavanagh, Lindsay E Calderon, Daniel M Saman, Said K Abusalem

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. A rapid and naked-eye methicillin resistantFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Decolonization ofJournal of healthcare engineering · 2018
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Prophylactic Postoperative Antibiotics May Not Reduce Pin Site Infections After External Fixation.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2017
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kevin T KavanaghHealth Watch USA, 3396 Woodhaven Dr, Somerset, KY 42503, USA.
Lindsay E CalderonEastern Kentucky University, Richmond, KY, USA.
Daniel M SamanHealth Watch USA, 3396 Woodhaven Dr, Somerset, KY 42503, USA ; Essentia Institute of Rural Health, Duluth, MN, USA.
Said K AbusalemHealth Watch USA, 3396 Woodhaven Dr, Somerset, KY 42503, USA ; University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA.
World Water Watch · USEastern Kentucky University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality (AHRQ) found that Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is associated with up to 375,000 infections and 23,000 deaths in the United States. It is a major cause of surgical site infections, with a higher mortality and longer duration of care than Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus. A multifactorial bundled approach is needed to control this epidemic, with single interventions unlikely to have a significant impact on attenuating MRSA infection rates. Active surveillance has been studied in a wide range of surgical patients, including surgical intensive care and non-intensive care units; cardiac, vascular, orthopedic, obstetric, head and neck cancer and gastrostomy patients. There is sufficient evidence demonstrating a beneficial effect of surveillance and eradication prior to surgery to recommend its use on an expanded basis. Studies on MRSA surveillance in surgical patients that were published over the last 10 years were reviewed. In at least five of these studies, the MRSA colonization status of patients was reported to be a factor in preoperative antibiotic selection, with the modification of treatment regiments including the switching to vancomycin or teicoplanin in MRSA positive preoperative patients. Several authors also used decolonization protocols on all preoperative patients but used surveillance to determine the duration of the decolonization. Universal decolonization of all patients, regardless of MRSA status has been advocated as an alternative prevention protocol in which surveillance is not utilized. Concern exists regarding antimicrobial stewardship. The daily and universal use of intranasal antibiotics and/or antiseptic washes may encourage the promotion of bacterial resistance and provide a competitive advantage to other more lethal organisms. Decolonization protocols which indiscriminately neutralize all bacteria may not be the best approach. If a patient's microbiome is markedly challenged with antimicrobials, rebuilding it with replacement commensal bacteria may become a future therapy. Preoperative MRSA surveillance allows the selection of appropriate prophylactic antibiotics, the use of extended decolonization protocols in positive patients, and provides needed data for epidemiological studies.

Identifiers

PMID24847437
PMCPMC4028005
OpenAlexW2117426734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.