ArticleBMC infectious diseases2024
Role of Xpert PCR kit in assessing MRSA colonization in medical and surgical units of a tertiary care teaching hospital.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and rationaleMethicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization increases the risk of MRSA infection. Detecting MRSA colonization can influence postoperative outcomes and prolong hospital stay. The conventional standard culture method for detecting MRSA colonization has limitations in terms of sensitivity and turnaround time. Hence, we sought out use of Xpert PCR kit for prompt evaluation of MRSA colonization to support MRSA prevention in a tertiary care hospital in Karachi, Pakistan. MATERIALS AND
methodsDuring 1st April-31st December 2022, 290 nasal and skin swab samples were collected from 257 patients and processed using routine culture (as gold standard method) and PCR-based MRSA detection assay (MRSA Xpert).
resultsA total of two hundred and ninety (290) swab samples from 257 patients were obtained, 33 of which were paired. The overall prevalence of MRSA colonization was 12% by both methods, with 90% of cases classified as community-associated (CA-MRSA) whereas 10% as hospital-acquired (HA-MRSA). The colonized group showed a higher subsequent MRSA infection rate (11% vs. 3.5%) compared to the noncolonized group. Culture identified 11% of screening samples as MRSA positive, Xpert MRSA assay showed 100% sensitivity and 95% specificity. The cost of a single MRSA Xpert assay was $50 while MRSA culture cost around $7.50.
conclusionOur study findings suggest that the presence of MRSA colonization in our cohort of patients is consistent with the existing trends in hospital epidemiology. Both conventional culture and Xpert MRSA methods showed comparable efficacy for detection of MRSA colonization. Larger-scale studies are recommended to validate these findings conclusively.
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.