Logo image
To screen or not to screen for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

To screen or not to screen for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Lance R Peterson and Daniel J Diekema
Journal of clinical microbiology, Vol.48(3), pp.683-689
03/2010
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02516-09
PMID: 20071548
url
https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02516-09View
Published (Version of record) Open Access

Abstract

There are few more compelling questions in clinical microbiology today than the issue of whether or not to screen for the presence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), with the results being used to institute infection control interventions aimed at preventing transmission of MRSA in health care environments. Numerous different matters must be addressed when considering a screening program. Who is to be screened, what method is to be employed to detect MRSA, and what sites should be sampled? When and how often should the screening be performed? Who is going to pay for the screening, and, finally and perhaps most importantly, how are screening results to be communicated to health care providers and what kind of interventions are best undertaken based on the results? Numerous governmental agencies have mandated MRSA screening programs, and yet several authorities in infection control organizations have questioned the appropriateness of mandated screening. In this Point-Counterpoint feature, Dr. Lance Peterson of Evanston Hospital (Evanston, IL) offers his perspective on why screening for MRSA is to be encouraged. Dr. Daniel Diekema of the University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine (Iowa City, IA) offers an opposing view.
Staphylococcal Infections - diagnosis Mass Screening Cross Infection - prevention & control Humans Carrier State - microbiology Cross Infection - diagnosis Staphylococcal Infections - prevention & control Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus - isolation & purification Infection Control - methods

Details

Metrics

Logo image