BACKGROUND: USA300 is the most prevalent strain type of community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), but the proportion of patients colonized with USA300 strains and their risk for infection are largely unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of USA300 strains among MRSA nasal colonizing isolates in our hospital, to identify risks for USA300 nasal colonization, and to determine risks of developing infection for nasally colonized patients. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients found to be nasally colonized with MRSA through active surveillance at a tertiary care hospital from January 2005 through December 2007. MRSA isolates were identified as USA300 or non-USA300. Risks for colonization and infection were identified with logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 1,306 MRSA nasal isolates, 307 (24%) were USA300 strains, and this proportion significantly increased over time (17.4% in 2005 and 26.7% in 2007; P = .003). African American race was an independent risk for USA300 nasal colonization (odds ratio [OR], 1.81 [95% confidence ratio {CI}, 1.38-2.38]). Older age (OR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.96-0.98]) and female sex (OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56-0.97]) decreased risk. Among nasally colonized patients, 238 (18.2%) developed infection. Increased length of stay (OR, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.01-1.06]) independently increased risk for infection among patients nasally colonized with USA300 MRSA, and female sex decreased risk (OR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.24-0.95]). Increased length of stay (OR, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.02-1.04]) and treatment in an intensive care unit (OR, 1.64 [95% CI, 1.10-2.44]) independently increased risk for infection among patients nasally colonized with non-USA300 MRSA, and female sex decreased risk (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.47-0.94]). CONCLUSION: The proportion of MRSA nasally colonized patients with USA300 strains significantly increased during the study, and risks included African American race. Strain type had no significant effect on the proportion of patients who developed infection, and risk factors for infection were similar.
BACKGROUND: USA300 is the most prevalent strain type of community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), but the proportion of patients colonized with USA300 strains and their risk for infection are largely unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of USA300 strains among MRSA nasal colonizing isolates in our hospital, to identify risks for USA300 nasal colonization, and to determine risks of developing infection for nasally colonized patients. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients found to be nasally colonized with MRSA through active surveillance at a tertiary care hospital from January 2005 through December 2007. MRSA isolates were identified as USA300 or non-USA300. Risks for colonization and infection were identified with logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 1,306 MRSA nasal isolates, 307 (24%) were USA300 strains, and this proportion significantly increased over time (17.4% in 2005 and 26.7% in 2007; P = .003). African American race was an independent risk for USA300 nasal colonization (odds ratio [OR], 1.81 [95% confidence ratio {CI}, 1.38-2.38]). Older age (OR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.96-0.98]) and female sex (OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56-0.97]) decreased risk. Among nasally colonized patients, 238 (18.2%) developed infection. Increased length of stay (OR, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.01-1.06]) independently increased risk for infection among patients nasally colonized with USA300 MRSA, and female sex decreased risk (OR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.24-0.95]). Increased length of stay (OR, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.02-1.04]) and treatment in an intensive care unit (OR, 1.64 [95% CI, 1.10-2.44]) independently increased risk for infection among patients nasally colonized with non-USA300 MRSA, and female sex decreased risk (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.47-0.94]). CONCLUSION: The proportion of MRSA nasally colonized patients with USA300 strains significantly increased during the study, and risks included African American race. Strain type had no significant effect on the proportion of patients who developed infection, and risk factors for infection were similar.
Authors: Nicole Gualandi; Yi Mu; Wendy M Bamberg; Ghinwa Dumyati; Lee H Harrison; Lindsey Lesher; Joelle Nadle; Sue Petit; Susan M Ray; William Schaffner; John Townes; Mariana McDonald; Isaac See Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2018-09-28 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Richard E Nelson; Vanessa W Stevens; Karim Khader; Makoto Jones; Matthew H Samore; Martin E Evans; R Douglas Scott; Rachel B Slayton; Marin L Schweizer; Eli L Perencevich; Michael A Rubin Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Valerie S Albrecht; Brandi M Limbago; Gregory J Moran; Anusha Krishnadasan; Rachel J Gorwitz; Linda K McDougal; David A Talan Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2015-08-19 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Fred C Tenover; Isabella A Tickler; Richard V Goering; Barry N Kreiswirth; José R Mediavilla; David H Persing Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2011-12-12 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: S K McAllister; V S Albrecht; G E Fosheim; H K Lowery; P J Peters; R Gorwitz; J L Guest; J Hageman; R Mindley; L K McDougal; D Rimland; B Limbago Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2011-10-12 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Amy E Peterson; Meghan F Davis; Kathleen G Julian; Grace Awantang; Wallace H Greene; Lance B Price; Andrew Waters; Avanthi Doppalapudi; Lisa J Krain; Kenrad Nelson; Ellen K Silbergeld; Cynthia J Whitener Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-06-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Meghan F Davis; Amy E Peterson; Kathleen G Julian; Wallace H Greene; Lance B Price; Kenrad Nelson; Cynthia J Whitener; Ellen K Silbergeld Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-01-24 Impact factor: 3.240