Observational studyBMC pulmonary medicine2016
Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus acquisition in healthcare workers with cystic fibrosis: a retrospective cross-sectional study.
Observational study in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intermittent colonisation with Methicillin-ResistantAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in health-care workers with cystic fibrosis in Sydney.Respirology case reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeople with cystic fibrosis (CF) may work in healthcare settings risking nosocomial pathogen acquisition. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection in adult healthcare workers with CF (HCWcf).
methodsData was collected in this observational study on MRSA acquisition from 405 CF patients attending an adult CF centre in Australia between 2001-2012. Demographic and clinical characteristics were compared between HCWcf and non-HCWcf. A sub-analysis was subsequently performed to compare demographic and clinical characteristics between those patients (HCWcf versus non-HCWcf) that acquired MRSA. We also investigated rates of chronic MRSA infection and the outcome of eradication treatment in HCWcf.
resultsA higher proportion of HCWcf acquired MRSA [n = 10/21] compared to non-HCWcf [n = 40/255] (P <0.001). The odds of MRSA acquisition were 8.4 (95 % CI, 3.0 - 23.4) times greater in HCWcf than non-HCWcf. HCWcf with MRSA were older (P = 0.02) and had better lung function (P = 0.009), yet hospitalisation rates were similar compared to non-HCWcf with MRSA. Chronic MRSA infection developed in 36/50 CF patients (HCWcf, n = 6; non-HCWcf, n = 30), with eradication therapy achieved in 5/6 (83 %) HCWcf.
conclusionsThe rate of MRSA incidence was highest in HCWcf and the workplace is a possible source of acquisition. Vocational guidance should include the potential for MRSA acquisition for CF patients considering healthcare professions.
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.