ArticleJournal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society2016
Regional Epidemiology of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Among Critically Ill Children in a State With Mandated Active Surveillance.
Article in Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular characteristics and antimicrobial susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus among children with respiratory tract infections in southwest China.World journal of pediatrics : WJP · 2020Article
- Evaluating a neonatal intensive care unit MRSA surveillance programme using agent-based network modelling.The Journal of hospital infection · 2018Article
- Performance of an electronic health record-based phenotype algorithm to identify community associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus cases and controls for genetic association studies.BMC infectious diseases · 2016Article
- Epidemiology of Methicillin-resistantJournal of global infectious diseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn theory, active surveillance of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) reduces MRSA spread by identifying all MRSA-colonized patients and placing them under contact precautions. In October 2007, Illinois mandated active MRSA surveillance in all intensive care units, including neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) and pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). We evaluated MRSA trends in a large metropolitan region in the wake of this law.
methodsChicago hospitals with a NICU or PICU were recruited for 8 single-day point prevalence surveys that occurred twice-yearly between June 2008 and July 2011 and then yearly in 2012 to 2013. Samples from all patients were cultured for MRSA (nose and umbilicus for neonates, nose and groin for pediatric patients). Hospital-reported admission MRSA-screening results also were obtained. Point prevalence cultures were screened for MRSA by using broth enrichment, chromogenic agar, and standard confirmatory methods.
resultsAll eligible hospitals (N = 10) participated (10 NICUs, 6 PICUs). Hospital-reported adherence to state-mandated MRSA screening at admission was high (95% for NICUs, 94% for PICUs). From serial point prevalence surveys, overall MRSA prevalences in the NICUs and PICUs were 4.2% (89 of 2101) and 5.7% (36 of 632), respectively. MRSA colonization prevalences were unchanged in the NICUs (year-over-year risk ratio [RR], 0.93 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.78-1.12]; P = .45) and trended toward an increase in the PICUs (RR, 1.25 [95% CI, 0.72-2.12]; P = .053). We estimated that 81% and 40% of MRSA-positive patients in the NICUs and PICUs, respectively, had newly acquired MRSA.
conclusionsIn a region with mandated active MRSA surveillance, we found ongoing unchanged rates of MRSA colonization and acquisition among NICU and PICU patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.