Josée Rioux1, Jenny Edwards1, Lauren Bresee2, Adrian Abu-Ulba3, Stephen Yu3, Deonne Dersch-Mills4, Ben Wilson5. 1. BScPharm, ACPR, is with Pharmacy Services, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta. 2. BScPharm, ACPR, MSc, PhD, is with the Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, and the O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta; and the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, Ottawa, Ontario. 3. BScPharm, is with Pharmacy Services, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta. 4. BScPharm, ACPR, PharmD, is with Pharmacy Services, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta. 5. MD, FRCPC, is with the Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nasal-swab screening for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has a quicker turnaround time than other bacterial culture methods, with results available within 24 h. Although MRSA nasal-swab screening is not intended to guide antimicrobial therapy, this method may give clinicians additional information for earlier tailoring of empiric antimicrobial agents. OBJECTIVE: To describe the diagnostic characteristics of nasal-swab screening in predicting MRSA infections in hospitalized patients receiving empiric treatment with IV vancomycin. METHODS: A retrospective observational chart review was conducted for newly admitted adult patients of the Peter Lougheed Centre in Calgary, Alberta, who were treated empirically with IV vancomycin from January to October 2015 and who underwent nasal-swab screening for MRSA. The diagnostic characteristics of nasal-swab screening were calculated in relation to corresponding culture results for samples collected on admission. RESULTS: For the 273 patients included in this study, nasal-swab screening for MRSA showed the following diagnostic characteristics in relation to bacterial culture results: sensitivity 58.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 28.6%-83.5%), specificity 93.9% (95% CI 90.0%-96.3%), positive predictive value 30.4% (95% CI 14.1%-53.0%), negative predictive value 98.0% (95% CI 95.1%-99.3%), positive likelihood ratio 9.5 (95% CI 4.9-18.7), and negative likelihood ratio 0.4 (95% CI 0.2-0.9). CONCLUSIONS: Given the high specificity of this rapid method, clinicians should ensure that patients who are receiving empiric treatment for MRSA infection and who have a positive result on nasal-swab screening continue to receive MRSA coverage until culture results are available. In addition, the high negative predictive value and positive likelihood ratio for nasal-swab screening in a low-prevalence setting suggest that a negative result significantly reduces the probability of MRSA infection. Although nasal-swab screening for MRSA is currently used for determining isolation precautions, this method also had utility in helping clinicians to predict the probability of MRSA infection and in guiding decisions about antimicrobial therapy.
BACKGROUND: Nasal-swab screening for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has a quicker turnaround time than other bacterial culture methods, with results available within 24 h. Although MRSA nasal-swab screening is not intended to guide antimicrobial therapy, this method may give clinicians additional information for earlier tailoring of empiric antimicrobial agents. OBJECTIVE: To describe the diagnostic characteristics of nasal-swab screening in predicting MRSA infections in hospitalized patients receiving empiric treatment with IV vancomycin. METHODS: A retrospective observational chart review was conducted for newly admitted adult patients of the Peter Lougheed Centre in Calgary, Alberta, who were treated empirically with IV vancomycin from January to October 2015 and who underwent nasal-swab screening for MRSA. The diagnostic characteristics of nasal-swab screening were calculated in relation to corresponding culture results for samples collected on admission. RESULTS: For the 273 patients included in this study, nasal-swab screening for MRSA showed the following diagnostic characteristics in relation to bacterial culture results: sensitivity 58.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 28.6%-83.5%), specificity 93.9% (95% CI 90.0%-96.3%), positive predictive value 30.4% (95% CI 14.1%-53.0%), negative predictive value 98.0% (95% CI 95.1%-99.3%), positive likelihood ratio 9.5 (95% CI 4.9-18.7), and negative likelihood ratio 0.4 (95% CI 0.2-0.9). CONCLUSIONS: Given the high specificity of this rapid method, clinicians should ensure that patients who are receiving empiric treatment for MRSA infection and who have a positive result on nasal-swab screening continue to receive MRSA coverage until culture results are available. In addition, the high negative predictive value and positive likelihood ratio for nasal-swab screening in a low-prevalence setting suggest that a negative result significantly reduces the probability of MRSA infection. Although nasal-swab screening for MRSA is currently used for determining isolation precautions, this method also had utility in helping clinicians to predict the probability of MRSA infection and in guiding decisions about antimicrobial therapy.
Authors: Sara A Hennessy; Puja M Shah; Christopher A Guidry; Stephen W Davies; Tjasa Hranjec; Robert G Sawyer Journal: Surg Infect (Larchmt) Date: 2015-06-12 Impact factor: 2.150
Authors: Matthew C Byrnes; Titi Adegboyega; Andrew Riggle; Jeffrey Chipman; Greg Beilman; Patty Reicks; Kim Boeser; Eric Irwin Journal: Surg Infect (Larchmt) Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 2.150
Authors: Cimi C Achiam; Christopher Mahendra Bernard Fernandes; Shelley L McLeod; Marina I Salvadori; Michael John; Jamie A Seabrook; Karl D Theakston; Susan Milburn; Zafar Hussain Journal: Eur J Emerg Med Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 2.799
Authors: Joelle Arieno; Robert Seabury; Wesley Kufel; William Darko; Christopher D Miller; William Paolo; Gregory Cwikla; Scott Riddell; Luke A Probst; Jeffrey M Steele Journal: Hosp Pharm Date: 2021-04-24