ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2016
Multicenter Evaluation of MRSASelect II Chromogenic Agar for Identification of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus from Wound and Nasal Specimens.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Comparing methods to estimate incremental inpatient costs and length of stay due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Alberta, Canada.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Multicenter Evaluation of the Xpert MRSA NxG Assay for Detection of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Nasal Swabs.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2018Article
- Multidrug-Resistant Microorganisms Colonizing Lower Extremity Wounds in Patients in a Tertiary Care Hospital, Lima, Peru.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2017Article
- Evaluation of the BD Max StaphSR Assay for Detecting Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Methicillin-Susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) in ESwab-Collected Wound Samples.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2017Article
- Novel applications for a noninvasive sampling method of the nasal mucosa.American journal of physiology. Lung cellular and molecular physiology · 2017Article
- Methicillin-ResistantIndian journal of nephrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hospitals strive to reduce methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) prevalence via active surveillance of inpatient populations. Rapid and inexpensive screening methods are utilized when molecular methods are not operationally feasible. In this multisite clinical trial, the utility of Bio-Rad's MRSASelect II was evaluated for MRSA identification from remnant nares and wound swabs. The prevalence of MRSA was 11.1% (n = 1,384) from nares samples and 18.1% (n = 842) from wound samples. MRSASelect II had an overall concordance of 95.4% (confidence interval [CI] = 94.5% to 96.2%) compared to a broth-enriched reference standard. Comparisons between results, stratified by examination times, exhibited a nonsignificant trend toward increased positivity at prolonged incubation times. Cefoxitin screening of colonies directly from MRSASelect II was 96.7% (95.8% to 97.3%) concordant compared to testing of colonies following broth enrichment. A comparison of MRSASelect and MRSASelect II revealed no statistical differences; however, the latter exhibited earlier positivity, greater selectivity, and more intense indicator staining, which resulted in facilitated differentiation of positive results. MRSASelect II agar is a simple, rapid, and robust method to routinely screen patients for MRSA colonization without the need for additional testing.
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.