OBJECTIVE: There are significant limitations of the standard case-control study design for identifying risk factors for resistant organisms. The objective of this study was to develop a study design to overcome these limitations. DESIGN: Theoretical analysis of different types of study designs that can be used in risk factor studies for resistant organisms. RESULTS: We developed the case-case-control study design, which uses two separate case-control analyses within a single study. The first analysis compares patients infected with resistant bacteria (resistant cases) with control-patients without infection caused by the target organism, who are therefore representative of the source population; and the second analysis compares patients infected with the susceptible phenotype of the target organism (susceptible cases) with the same control-patients without infection caused by the target organism. These two analyses provide risk models for (1) isolation of the resistant phenotype of the target organism as compared with the source population and (2) isolation of the susceptible phenotype of the organism as compared with the source population. When these two risk models are compared and contrasted, risk factors specifically associated with isolation of the resistant phenotype can be identified. CONCLUSIONS: The case-case-control study design is an effective method for identifying risk factors for antimicrobial-resistant pathogens. Although the case-case-control study design has limitations, it is, in our opinion, more informative and less flawed than the standard case-control study design.
OBJECTIVE: There are significant limitations of the standard case-control study design for identifying risk factors for resistant organisms. The objective of this study was to develop a study design to overcome these limitations. DESIGN: Theoretical analysis of different types of study designs that can be used in risk factor studies for resistant organisms. RESULTS: We developed the case-case-control study design, which uses two separate case-control analyses within a single study. The first analysis compares patients infected with resistant bacteria (resistant cases) with control-patients without infection caused by the target organism, who are therefore representative of the source population; and the second analysis compares patients infected with the susceptible phenotype of the target organism (susceptible cases) with the same control-patients without infection caused by the target organism. These two analyses provide risk models for (1) isolation of the resistant phenotype of the target organism as compared with the source population and (2) isolation of the susceptible phenotype of the organism as compared with the source population. When these two risk models are compared and contrasted, risk factors specifically associated with isolation of the resistant phenotype can be identified. CONCLUSIONS: The case-case-control study design is an effective method for identifying risk factors for antimicrobial-resistant pathogens. Although the case-case-control study design has limitations, it is, in our opinion, more informative and less flawed than the standard case-control study design.
Authors: Keith S Kaye; Zeina A Kanafani; Ashley E Dodds; John J Engemann; Stephen G Weber; Yehuda Carmeli Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: M Montero; M Sala; M Riu; F Belvis; M Salvado; S Grau; J P Horcajada; F Alvarez-Lerma; R Terradas; M Orozco-Levi; X Castells; H Knobel Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2009-12-24 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Ingi Lee; Neil O Fishman; Theoklis E Zaoutis; Knashawn H Morales; Mark G Weiner; Marie Synnestvedt; Irving Nachamkin; Ebbing Lautenbach Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2009-02-23
Authors: Benjamin A Rogers; Paul R Ingram; Naomi Runnegar; Matthew C Pitman; Joshua T Freeman; Eugene Athan; Sally M Havers; Hanna E Sidjabat; Mark Jones; Earleen Gunning; Mary De Almeida; Kaylene Styles; David L Paterson Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2014-01-27 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Laura J Rojas; Madiha Salim; Eric Cober; Sandra S Richter; Federico Perez; Robert A Salata; Robert C Kalayjian; Richard R Watkins; Steve Marshall; Susan D Rudin; T Nicholas Domitrovic; Andrea M Hujer; Kristine M Hujer; Yohei Doi; Keith S Kaye; Scott Evans; Vance G Fowler; Robert A Bonomo; David van Duin Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 9.079