Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26849655›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Costs and Benefits Associated with the MRSA Search and Destroy Policy in a Hospital in the Region Kennemerland, The Netherlands.

Dennis Souverein, Patricia Houtman, Sjoerd M Euser, Bjorn L Herpers, Jan Kluytmans, Jeroen W Den Boer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. A case study onJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2020
    Review
  11. Epidemiology and control of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Stockholm County, Sweden, 2000 to 2016: overview of a "search-and-contain" strategy.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2019
    Article
  12. Changing epidemiology of meticillin-resistantEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2019
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
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

6 authors.

Dennis SouvereinDepartment of Epidemiology and Infection Prevention, Regional Public Health Laboratory Kennemerland, Haarlem, the Netherlands.
Patricia HoutmanDepartment of Infection Control, Kennemer Gasthuis, Haarlem, The Netherlands.
Sjoerd M EuserDepartment of Epidemiology and Infection Prevention, Regional Public Health Laboratory Kennemerland, Haarlem, the Netherlands.
Bjorn L HerpersDepartment of Epidemiology and Infection Prevention, Regional Public Health Laboratory Kennemerland, Haarlem, the Netherlands.
Jan KluytmansLaboratory for Microbiology and Infection Control, Amphia Hospital, Breda, and University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jeroen W Den BoerDepartment of Epidemiology and Infection Prevention, Regional Public Health Laboratory Kennemerland, Haarlem, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of this study was to analyze the costs and benefits of the MRSA Search and Destroy (S&D) policy between 2008 and 2013 in the Kennemer Gasthuis, a 400 bed teaching hospital in the region Kennemerland, the Netherlands.

methodsA patient registration database was used to retrospectively calculate costs, including screening, isolation, follow-up, contact tracing, cleaning, treatment, deployment of extra healthcare workers, salary for an infection control practitioner (ICP) and service of isolation rooms. The estimated benefits (costs and lives when no MRSA S&D was applied) were based on a varying MRSA prevalence rate (up to 50%).

resultsWhen no MRSA S&D policy was applied, the additional costs and deaths due to MRSA bacteraemia were estimated to be € 1,388,907 and 33 respectively (at a MRSA prevalence rate of 50%). Currently, the total costs were estimated to be € 290,672 (€ 48,445 annually) and a MRSA prevalence rate of 17.3% was considered as break-even point. Between 2008 and 2013, a total of 576 high risk patients were screened for MRSA carriage, of whom 19 (3.3%) were found to be MRSA positive. Forty-nine patients (72.1%) were found unexpectedly.

conclusionsApplication of the MRSA S&D policy saves lives and money, although the high rate of unexpected MRSA cases is alarming.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisEconomics, HospitalFollow-Up StudiesHealth PersonnelHumansMass ScreeningMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusNetherlandsPatient IsolationRiskStaphylococcal Infections

Identifiers

PMID26849655
PMCPMC4744028

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.