Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27516471›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2016

Universal hospital admission screening for carbapenemase-producing organisms in a low-prevalence setting.

Jonathan A Otter, Eleonora Dyakova, Karen N Bisnauthsing, Antonio Querol-Rubiera, Amita Patel, Chioma Ahanonu, Olga Tosas Auguet, Jonathan D Edgeworth, Simon D Goldenberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Epidemiology and Transmission of Carbapenemase-ProducingAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Incidence of infections due to third generation cephalosporin-resistantAntimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2018
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. 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

9 authors.

Jonathan A OtterCentre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research (CIDR), Department of Infectious Diseases, King's College London & Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Eleonora DyakovaCentre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research (CIDR), Department of Infectious Diseases, King's College London & Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Karen N BisnauthsingCentre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research (CIDR), Department of Infectious Diseases, King's College London & Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Antonio Querol-RubieraCentre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research (CIDR), Department of Infectious Diseases, King's College London & Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Amita PatelCentre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research (CIDR), Department of Infectious Diseases, King's College London & Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Chioma AhanonuCentre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research (CIDR), Department of Infectious Diseases, King's College London & Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Olga Tosas AuguetCentre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research (CIDR), Department of Infectious Diseases, King's College London & Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Jonathan D EdgeworthCentre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research (CIDR), Department of Infectious Diseases, King's College London & Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Simon D GoldenbergCentre for Clinical Infection and Diagnostics Research (CIDR), Department of Infectious Diseases, King's College London & Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK simon.goldenberg@gstt.nhs.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCarbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) are an emerging threat for healthcare providers worldwide.

objectivesTo determine CPE carriage rates and risk factors in an unselected hospital cohort at the time of admission.

methodsWe approached 4567 patients within 72 h of admission to provide a rectal swab and answer a questionnaire on risk factors for carriage. Rectal swabs were cultured for carbapenem-resistant organisms on chromogenic and non-chromogenic agar, and tested for carbapenemase production by PCR (Check-Direct CPE). The study was approved by the NHS Research Ethics Committee.

resultsOnly 6 CPE were cultured from 5 (0.1%) of 4006 patients who provided a rectal swab; only 1 was cultured using non-chromogenic media. An additional 76 culture-negative rectal swabs were initially PCR positive, but none grew a carbapenem-resistant organism despite enrichment culture and only two were positive when retested several months later by Check-Direct and a second PCR assay (Cepheid GeneXpert

conclusionsThis study highlights a very low carriage rate of CPE. Hospitalization abroad is the most important risk factor to guide admission screening in this low-prevalence setting.

Indexed as

AdultBacterial ProteinsBacteriological Techniquesbeta-LactamasesCarrier StateDiagnostic Tests, RoutineEnterobacteriaceaeEnterobacteriaceae InfectionsFemaleGenotyping TechniquesHospitalsHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPolymerase Chain ReactionBacterial Proteinsbeta-Lactamasescarbapenemase

Identifiers

PMID27516471
PMCPMC5890656

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.