Cargando…
MRSA carriage among healthcare workers in non-outbreak settings in Europe and the United States: a systematic review
ABSTARCT: BACKGROUND: A recent review estimated prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in healthcare workers (HCWs) to be 4.6%. However, MRSA carriage in HCWs in non-outbreak settings is thought to be higher than in an outbreak situation, due to increased hygiene awareness...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4094410/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24996225 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-363 |
_version_ | 1782325819681538048 |
---|---|
author | Dulon, Madeleine Peters, Claudia Schablon, Anja Nienhaus, Albert |
author_facet | Dulon, Madeleine Peters, Claudia Schablon, Anja Nienhaus, Albert |
author_sort | Dulon, Madeleine |
collection | PubMed |
description | ABSTARCT: BACKGROUND: A recent review estimated prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in healthcare workers (HCWs) to be 4.6%. However, MRSA carriage in HCWs in non-outbreak settings is thought to be higher than in an outbreak situation, due to increased hygiene awareness in outbreaks, but valid data are missing. The goals of this paper are to summarise the prevalence of MRSA carriage amongst HCWs in non-outbreak situations and to identify occupational groups in healthcare services associated with a higher risk of MRSA colonisation. METHODS: A systematic search for literature was conducted in the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using seven criteria. Pooled prevalence rates were calculated. Pooled effect estimates were identified in a meta-analysis. RESULTS: 31 studies were included in this review. The pooled MRSA colonisation rate was 1.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34%-2.50%). The rate increased to 4.4% (95% CI, 3.98%-4.88%) when one study from the Netherlands was excluded. The pooled MRSA rate was highest in nursing staff (6.9%). Nursing staff had an odds ratio of 1.72 (95% CI, 1.07-2.77) when compared with medical staff and an odds ratio of 2.58 (95%, 1.83-3.66) when compared with other healthcare staff. Seven studies were assessed as being of high quality. The pooled MRSA prevalence in high quality studies was 1.1% or 5.4% if the one large study from the Netherlands is not considered. The pooled prevalence in studies of moderate quality was 4.0%. CONCLUSIONS: MRSA prevalence among HCWs in non-outbreak settings was no higher than carriage rates estimated for outbreaks. Our estimate is in the lower half of the range of the published MRSA rates in the endemic setting. Our findings demonstrate that nursing staff have an increased risk for MRSA colonisation. In order to confirm this finding, more studies are needed, including healthcare professionals with varying degrees of exposure to MRSA. In order to reduce misclassification bias, standardisation of HCWs screening is warranted. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4094410 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-40944102014-07-12 MRSA carriage among healthcare workers in non-outbreak settings in Europe and the United States: a systematic review Dulon, Madeleine Peters, Claudia Schablon, Anja Nienhaus, Albert BMC Infect Dis Research Article ABSTARCT: BACKGROUND: A recent review estimated prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in healthcare workers (HCWs) to be 4.6%. However, MRSA carriage in HCWs in non-outbreak settings is thought to be higher than in an outbreak situation, due to increased hygiene awareness in outbreaks, but valid data are missing. The goals of this paper are to summarise the prevalence of MRSA carriage amongst HCWs in non-outbreak situations and to identify occupational groups in healthcare services associated with a higher risk of MRSA colonisation. METHODS: A systematic search for literature was conducted in the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using seven criteria. Pooled prevalence rates were calculated. Pooled effect estimates were identified in a meta-analysis. RESULTS: 31 studies were included in this review. The pooled MRSA colonisation rate was 1.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34%-2.50%). The rate increased to 4.4% (95% CI, 3.98%-4.88%) when one study from the Netherlands was excluded. The pooled MRSA rate was highest in nursing staff (6.9%). Nursing staff had an odds ratio of 1.72 (95% CI, 1.07-2.77) when compared with medical staff and an odds ratio of 2.58 (95%, 1.83-3.66) when compared with other healthcare staff. Seven studies were assessed as being of high quality. The pooled MRSA prevalence in high quality studies was 1.1% or 5.4% if the one large study from the Netherlands is not considered. The pooled prevalence in studies of moderate quality was 4.0%. CONCLUSIONS: MRSA prevalence among HCWs in non-outbreak settings was no higher than carriage rates estimated for outbreaks. Our estimate is in the lower half of the range of the published MRSA rates in the endemic setting. Our findings demonstrate that nursing staff have an increased risk for MRSA colonisation. In order to confirm this finding, more studies are needed, including healthcare professionals with varying degrees of exposure to MRSA. In order to reduce misclassification bias, standardisation of HCWs screening is warranted. BioMed Central 2014-07-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4094410/ /pubmed/24996225 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-363 Text en Copyright © 2014 Dulon et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Dulon, Madeleine Peters, Claudia Schablon, Anja Nienhaus, Albert MRSA carriage among healthcare workers in non-outbreak settings in Europe and the United States: a systematic review |
title | MRSA carriage among healthcare workers in non-outbreak settings in Europe and the United States: a systematic review |
title_full | MRSA carriage among healthcare workers in non-outbreak settings in Europe and the United States: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | MRSA carriage among healthcare workers in non-outbreak settings in Europe and the United States: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | MRSA carriage among healthcare workers in non-outbreak settings in Europe and the United States: a systematic review |
title_short | MRSA carriage among healthcare workers in non-outbreak settings in Europe and the United States: a systematic review |
title_sort | mrsa carriage among healthcare workers in non-outbreak settings in europe and the united states: a systematic review |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4094410/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24996225 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-363 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dulonmadeleine mrsacarriageamonghealthcareworkersinnonoutbreaksettingsineuropeandtheunitedstatesasystematicreview AT petersclaudia mrsacarriageamonghealthcareworkersinnonoutbreaksettingsineuropeandtheunitedstatesasystematicreview AT schablonanja mrsacarriageamonghealthcareworkersinnonoutbreaksettingsineuropeandtheunitedstatesasystematicreview AT nienhausalbert mrsacarriageamonghealthcareworkersinnonoutbreaksettingsineuropeandtheunitedstatesasystematicreview |