2009
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2009.02954.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The nose is not the only relevant MRSA screening site

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

3
13
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
(16 reference statements)
3
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This theory is not borne out by data from the USA, where community-acquired PVL-positive MRSA infection is common but most individuals are colonised with PVL-negative MSSA strains 1 . This finding suggests that disease can occur in the absence of nasal colonisation, 74 and evidence increasingly suggests that non-nasal sites such as the throat 75 and inguinal areas might be important colonisation sites for PVL-positive S aureus 76 . Results of a large study 77 of S aureus transmission in the household suggest interplay between colonisation and disease-causing isolates is complex and might depend on bacterial strain.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This theory is not borne out by data from the USA, where community-acquired PVL-positive MRSA infection is common but most individuals are colonised with PVL-negative MSSA strains 1 . This finding suggests that disease can occur in the absence of nasal colonisation, 74 and evidence increasingly suggests that non-nasal sites such as the throat 75 and inguinal areas might be important colonisation sites for PVL-positive S aureus 76 . Results of a large study 77 of S aureus transmission in the household suggest interplay between colonisation and disease-causing isolates is complex and might depend on bacterial strain.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A cross-sectional study of adults and children with S. aureus skin infections and their household contacts indicated that a nare-only survey would have missed 38% of MSSA and 51% of MRSA colonized persons [20]. Overall, most studies focus on patient populations with a history of ongoing skin infection or substantial risk factors of MRSA colonization; however, the literature increasingly supports the role of extra-nare site screening, especially the oropharynx [24-26]. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In various studies, the sensitivity of an anterior nares culture for MRSA nasal colonization ranged from 41 to 93% (7-11, 19, 21-24, 26-30), while the sensitivity of combined nose and throat cultures ranged from 80 to 100% (8,9,11,19,22,23,26). The NPV of a nasal culture alone varied from 87 to 98.8%, while the NPV of nasal plus throat cultures ranged from 92 to 100% (Table 1) (7)(8)(9)(10)(11). Given the fact that aspiration of pathogens from the oropharynx is the primary route of bacteria entering the lower respiratory tract (2), the data described above provide strong evidence that MRSA pneumonia is unlikely in patients who are not colonized in the nose and throat and have no evidence of MRSA bacteremia.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We requested that care givers screen patients for both throat and nasal MRSA colonization, because previous studies have found that from 5 to 20% of patients may be colonized in the throat but not the nose (7,(9)(10)(11)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25). In various studies, the sensitivity of an anterior nares culture for MRSA nasal colonization ranged from 41 to 93% (7-11, 19, 21-24, 26-30), while the sensitivity of combined nose and throat cultures ranged from 80 to 100% (8,9,11,19,22,23,26).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation