ArticleJournal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England)2017
Screening for Methicillin-resistant
Article in Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 2017. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Therapy-relevant antibiotic resistances in a One Health context].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2023Review
- Prevalence and Risk Factors for Multidrug-Resistant Organisms Colonization in Long-Term Care Facilities Around the World: A Review.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince many hospitals report high MRSA colonization rates among elderly patients, and because it has been shown that
methodsIn a study period of 5 months, possibility of active PCR-based screening for MRSA has been tested within 2 residence homes for the elderly, with the obligation to avoid inconvenience to the daily working time and working schedule. Residents and staff members were included in the study and positive test results were confirmed with MRSA culture.
resultsFeasibility of active on site screening in a residence home for the elderly using a rapid PCR method has been confirmed. 154 of 156 residents participated on baseline testing for all current and new admitted residents. In 9 participating residents with former unknown status, nasal carriage with MRSA was confirmed (5.8%). Among 32 documented and eligible movements between the nursing home and the hospital, MRSA could be confirmed after return to the residence home in 2 cases (6.3%). MRSA could also be detected in 1 of 14 participating nursing staff (7.1%).
conclusionPrevalence of MRSA was in a range that has been observed for nursing homes in Germany in previous studies. Residents can acquire MRSA during a hospital stay so that further spread after re-admission into the nursing home cannot be excluded. This study shows that easy to perform direct screening tests in outpatient facilities for nursing of the elderly are promising tools as part of potential new strategies for transmission and infection control in such facilities. Additional studies are needed to investigate if screening followed by interventional hygiene measures can reduce MRSA transmission and infection in such facilities.
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.