Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37300560›Full record

ArticleAnnals of work exposures and health2023

A comparison of passive and active dust sampling methods for measuring airborne methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pig farms.

Anne E Rittscher, Abel A Vlasblom, Birgitta Duim, Peter Scherpenisse, Isabella J van Schothorst, Inge M Wouters, Liese Van Gompel, Lidwien A M Smit

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of work exposures and health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. First record of methicillin-resistantNew microbes and new infections · 2025
    Article
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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anne E RittscherInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences (IRAS), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 2, 3584 CM Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0001-4599-1253
Abel A VlasblomDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Immunology (I&I), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 1, 3584 CL, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Birgitta DuimDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Immunology (I&I), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 1, 3584 CL, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Peter ScherpenisseInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences (IRAS), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 2, 3584 CM Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Isabella J van SchothorstInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences (IRAS), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 2, 3584 CM Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Inge M WoutersInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences (IRAS), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 2, 3584 CM Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7834-9390
Liese Van GompelInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences (IRAS), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 2, 3584 CM Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6185-219X
Lidwien A M SmitInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences (IRAS), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 2, 3584 CM Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0292-0946
Utrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Methicillin-resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are resistant to most β-lactam antibiotics. Pigs are an important reservoir of livestock-associated MRSA (LA-MRSA), which is genetically distinct from both hospital and community-acquired MRSA. Occupational exposure to pigs on farms can lead to LA-MRSA carriage by workers. There is a growing body of research on MRSA found in the farm environment, the airborne route of transmission, and its implication on human health. This study aims to directly compare two sampling methods used to measure airborne MRSA in the farm environment; passive dust sampling with electrostatic dust fall collectors (EDCs), and active inhalable dust sampling using stationary air pumps with Gesamtstaubprobenahme (GSP) sampling heads containing Teflon filters. Paired dust samples using EDCs and GSP samplers, totaling 87 samples, were taken from 7 Dutch pig farms, in multiple compartments housing pigs of varying ages. Total nucleic acids of both types of dust samples were extracted and targets indicating MRSA (femA, nuc, mecA) and total bacterial count (16S rRNA) were quantified using quantitative real-time PCRs. MRSA could be measured from all GSP samples and in 94% of the EDCs, additionally MRSA was present on every farm sampled. There was a strong positive relationship between the paired MRSA levels found in EDCs and those measured on filters (Normalized by 16S rRNA; Pearson's correlation coefficient r = 0.94, Not Normalized; Pearson's correlation coefficient r = 0.84). This study suggests that EDCs can be used as an affordable and easily standardized method for quantifying airborne MRSA levels in the pig farm setting.

Indexed as

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusOccupational ExposureStaphylococcal InfectionsAnimalsDustFarmsHumansRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSwineDustRNA, Ribosomal, 16Sairbourne dustantimicrobial resistanceelectrostatic dust collectorsMRSAoccupational exposurepig farmsrespiratory exposure

Identifiers

PMID37300560
PMCPMC10516621
OpenAlexW4380225218

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.