ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2024
Clinical Efficacy of Nasal Screening and Methicillin-Resistant
Article in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Nasal colonization with methicillin-resistant Methods: All patients who underwent primary THA between April 2011, and March 2021 were included in this analysis. All patients were screened preoperatively for nasal MRSA approximately 1 month before surgery. Patients with nasal MRSA contamination are treated with topical mupirocin to eradicate the bacteria before surgery. The patients were examined again approximately two weeks before surgery. We evaluated the current screening and treatment of intranasal colonization with MRSA in our elective primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) patient population. Results: Out of 6251 patients, 106 (1.7%) had nasal MRSA contamination. The bacteria were not eradicated in three (3.6%) patients at the second screening. Twenty-two joints (0.35%) out of the 6251 had deep infections. Only 1 patient out of the 106 MRSA nasal carriers suffered from PJI. Twenty-one of the 6145 non-carriers had PJI. The difference between the prevalence of nasal MRSA contamination and the incidence of deep infections was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that screening of all patients for nasal MRSA before THA followed by mupirocin calcium treatment if needed is sufficient PJI prophylaxis.
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.