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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dulon, Madeleine, Peters, Claudia, Schablon, Anja, Nienhaus, Albert
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