Cargando…
A comparison of passive and active dust sampling methods for measuring airborne methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pig farms
Methicillin-resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are resistant to most β-lactam antibiotics. Pigs are an important reservoir of livestock-associated MRSA (LA-MRSA), which is genetically distinct from both hospital and community-acquired MRSA. Occupational exposure to pigs on farms can l...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10516621/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37300560 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxad033 |
_version_ | 1785109164706496512 |
---|---|
author | Rittscher, Anne E Vlasblom, Abel A Duim, Birgitta Scherpenisse, Peter van Schothorst, Isabella J Wouters, Inge M Van Gompel, Liese Smit, Lidwien A M |
author_facet | Rittscher, Anne E Vlasblom, Abel A Duim, Birgitta Scherpenisse, Peter van Schothorst, Isabella J Wouters, Inge M Van Gompel, Liese Smit, Lidwien A M |
author_sort | Rittscher, Anne E |
collection | PubMed |
description | Methicillin-resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are resistant to most β-lactam antibiotics. Pigs are an important reservoir of livestock-associated MRSA (LA-MRSA), which is genetically distinct from both hospital and community-acquired MRSA. Occupational exposure to pigs on farms can lead to LA-MRSA carriage by workers. There is a growing body of research on MRSA found in the farm environment, the airborne route of transmission, and its implication on human health. This study aims to directly compare two sampling methods used to measure airborne MRSA in the farm environment; passive dust sampling with electrostatic dust fall collectors (EDCs), and active inhalable dust sampling using stationary air pumps with Gesamtstaubprobenahme (GSP) sampling heads containing Teflon filters. Paired dust samples using EDCs and GSP samplers, totaling 87 samples, were taken from 7 Dutch pig farms, in multiple compartments housing pigs of varying ages. Total nucleic acids of both types of dust samples were extracted and targets indicating MRSA (femA, nuc, mecA) and total bacterial count (16S rRNA) were quantified using quantitative real-time PCRs. MRSA could be measured from all GSP samples and in 94% of the EDCs, additionally MRSA was present on every farm sampled. There was a strong positive relationship between the paired MRSA levels found in EDCs and those measured on filters (Normalized by 16S rRNA; Pearson’s correlation coefficient r = 0.94, Not Normalized; Pearson’s correlation coefficient r = 0.84). This study suggests that EDCs can be used as an affordable and easily standardized method for quantifying airborne MRSA levels in the pig farm setting. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10516621 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105166212023-09-23 A comparison of passive and active dust sampling methods for measuring airborne methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pig farms Rittscher, Anne E Vlasblom, Abel A Duim, Birgitta Scherpenisse, Peter van Schothorst, Isabella J Wouters, Inge M Van Gompel, Liese Smit, Lidwien A M Ann Work Expo Health Short Communications Methicillin-resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are resistant to most β-lactam antibiotics. Pigs are an important reservoir of livestock-associated MRSA (LA-MRSA), which is genetically distinct from both hospital and community-acquired MRSA. Occupational exposure to pigs on farms can lead to LA-MRSA carriage by workers. There is a growing body of research on MRSA found in the farm environment, the airborne route of transmission, and its implication on human health. This study aims to directly compare two sampling methods used to measure airborne MRSA in the farm environment; passive dust sampling with electrostatic dust fall collectors (EDCs), and active inhalable dust sampling using stationary air pumps with Gesamtstaubprobenahme (GSP) sampling heads containing Teflon filters. Paired dust samples using EDCs and GSP samplers, totaling 87 samples, were taken from 7 Dutch pig farms, in multiple compartments housing pigs of varying ages. Total nucleic acids of both types of dust samples were extracted and targets indicating MRSA (femA, nuc, mecA) and total bacterial count (16S rRNA) were quantified using quantitative real-time PCRs. MRSA could be measured from all GSP samples and in 94% of the EDCs, additionally MRSA was present on every farm sampled. There was a strong positive relationship between the paired MRSA levels found in EDCs and those measured on filters (Normalized by 16S rRNA; Pearson’s correlation coefficient r = 0.94, Not Normalized; Pearson’s correlation coefficient r = 0.84). This study suggests that EDCs can be used as an affordable and easily standardized method for quantifying airborne MRSA levels in the pig farm setting. Oxford University Press 2023-06-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10516621/ /pubmed/37300560 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxad033 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Occupational Hygiene Society. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Short Communications Rittscher, Anne E Vlasblom, Abel A Duim, Birgitta Scherpenisse, Peter van Schothorst, Isabella J Wouters, Inge M Van Gompel, Liese Smit, Lidwien A M A comparison of passive and active dust sampling methods for measuring airborne methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pig farms |
title | A comparison of passive and active dust sampling methods for measuring airborne methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pig farms |
title_full | A comparison of passive and active dust sampling methods for measuring airborne methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pig farms |
title_fullStr | A comparison of passive and active dust sampling methods for measuring airborne methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pig farms |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of passive and active dust sampling methods for measuring airborne methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pig farms |
title_short | A comparison of passive and active dust sampling methods for measuring airborne methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pig farms |
title_sort | comparison of passive and active dust sampling methods for measuring airborne methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus in pig farms |
topic | Short Communications |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10516621/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37300560 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxad033 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rittscherannee acomparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT vlasblomabela acomparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT duimbirgitta acomparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT scherpenissepeter acomparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT vanschothorstisabellaj acomparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT woutersingem acomparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT vangompelliese acomparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT smitlidwienam acomparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT rittscherannee comparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT vlasblomabela comparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT duimbirgitta comparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT scherpenissepeter comparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT vanschothorstisabellaj comparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT woutersingem comparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT vangompelliese comparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms AT smitlidwienam comparisonofpassiveandactivedustsamplingmethodsformeasuringairbornemethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureusinpigfarms |