Linda Verhoef1, Monique Roukens2, Sabine de Greeff3, Nico Meessen3, Stephanie Natsch2, Ellen Stobberingh3. 1. Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Antonie van Leeuwenhoeklaan 9, 3721 MA Bilthoven, The Netherlands linda.verhoef@rivm.nl. 2. Department of Pharmacy, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein-Zuid 10, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 3. Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Antonie van Leeuwenhoeklaan 9, 3721 MA Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess carriage of antimicrobial-resistant commensal microorganisms, i.e. Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus, and its predictors in long-term-care facilities (LTCFs). METHODS: Nasal swabs and/or urine or incontinence samples were collected from participating residents in 111 LTCFs and tested for the presence of S. aureus and/or E. coli, respectively. Antimicrobial resistance to eight antimicrobials was linked to antimicrobial usage in the year preceding sampling and to LTCF characteristics. Using multilevel logistic regression, predictors of carriage of ESBL-producing E. coli in LTCFs were identified. RESULTS: S. aureus was identified in 1269/4763 (26.6%) nasal swabs, including 13/4763 (0.3%) MRSA carriers in 9/107 (8%) LTCFs. Of the 5359 urine/incontinence samples, 2934 (55%) yielded E. coli, including 123 (4.2%) producing ESBL, which were found in 53/107 locations (range 1%-33%). For all but one antimicrobial (i.e. nitrofurantoin) >20% of isolated E. coli were resistant. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression identified two predictors of carriage of ESBL-producing E. coli: (i) antimicrobial usage (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-3.0 for each extra 50 DDD/1000 residents/day); and (ii) presence of MRSA carriers in the LTCFs (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.0-5.6). CONCLUSIONS: The low proportion of 4.2% ESBL-producing E. coli and the low prevalence of 0.3% MRSA carriage found in LTCF residents suggest that Dutch LTCFs are not yet an important reservoir of MDR potential pathogens. Nevertheless, the large variation between LTCFs warrants close monitoring of antimicrobial resistance in LTCFs. Integrated surveillance, i.e. linking data sources on antimicrobial usage, microbiological testing, clinical background data and epidemiological data, is needed.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess carriage of antimicrobial-resistant commensal microorganisms, i.e. Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus, and its predictors in long-term-care facilities (LTCFs). METHODS: Nasal swabs and/or urine or incontinence samples were collected from participating residents in 111 LTCFs and tested for the presence of S. aureus and/or E. coli, respectively. Antimicrobial resistance to eight antimicrobials was linked to antimicrobial usage in the year preceding sampling and to LTCF characteristics. Using multilevel logistic regression, predictors of carriage of ESBL-producing E. coli in LTCFs were identified. RESULTS:S. aureus was identified in 1269/4763 (26.6%) nasal swabs, including 13/4763 (0.3%) MRSA carriers in 9/107 (8%) LTCFs. Of the 5359 urine/incontinence samples, 2934 (55%) yielded E. coli, including 123 (4.2%) producing ESBL, which were found in 53/107 locations (range 1%-33%). For all but one antimicrobial (i.e. nitrofurantoin) >20% of isolated E. coli were resistant. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression identified two predictors of carriage of ESBL-producing E. coli: (i) antimicrobial usage (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-3.0 for each extra 50 DDD/1000 residents/day); and (ii) presence of MRSA carriers in the LTCFs (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.0-5.6). CONCLUSIONS: The low proportion of 4.2% ESBL-producing E. coli and the low prevalence of 0.3% MRSA carriage found in LTCF residents suggest that Dutch LTCFs are not yet an important reservoir of MDR potential pathogens. Nevertheless, the large variation between LTCFs warrants close monitoring of antimicrobial resistance in LTCFs. Integrated surveillance, i.e. linking data sources on antimicrobial usage, microbiological testing, clinical background data and epidemiological data, is needed.
Authors: Richard Aschbacher; Elisabetta Pagani; Massimo Confalonieri; Claudio Farina; Paolo Fazii; Francesco Luzzaro; Pier Giorgio Montanera; Aurora Piazza; Laura Pagani Journal: Antimicrob Resist Infect Control Date: 2016-10-11 Impact factor: 4.887
Authors: Eline van Dulm; Aletta T R Tholen; Annika Pettersson; Martijn S van Rooijen; Ina Willemsen; Peter Molenaar; Marjolein Damen; Paul Gruteke; Paul Oostvogel; Ed J Kuijper; Cees M P M Hertogh; Christina M J E Vandenbroucke-Grauls; Maarten Scholing Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-09-12 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Quinten R Ducarmon; Elisabeth M Terveer; Romy D Zwittink; Ed J Kuijper; Sam Nooij; Michelle N Bloem; Karuna E W Vendrik; Monique A A Caljouw; Ingrid M J G Sanders; Sofie M van Dorp; Man C Wong Journal: Genome Med Date: 2021-04-07 Impact factor: 11.117
Authors: Maha Mahmoud Alawi; Wail A Tashkandi; Mohamed A Basheikh; Faten M Warshan; Hazem Ahmed Ghobara; Rosemarie B Ramos; Mary Leilani Guiriba; Omar Ayob; Safiah Saad Janah; Anees Ahmad Sindi; Suheib Ali Abdulhamid Ahmed; Salah Dammnan; Esam Ibraheem Azhar; Ali A Rabaan; Salma Alnahdi; Maged Mohammed Bamahakesh Journal: Interdiscip Perspect Infect Dis Date: 2022-04-12
Authors: Enrico Ricchizzi; Katrien Latour; Tommi Kärki; Rossella Buttazzi; Béatrice Jans; Maria Luisa Moro; Olivia Aya Nakitanda; Diamantis Plachouras; Dominique L Monnet; Carl Suetens; Pete Kinross Journal: Euro Surveill Date: 2018-11