Title: Utility of Chromogenic Medium for Early Detection of Nasal Carriage of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) in Healthcare Professionals
Authors: Sarthak Verma, Avinash Laghawe, Navinchandra M. Kaore, Arti Jain, Tukaram Prabhu K
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v5i3.208
Abstract
Introduction: Resistance to methicillin in staphylococci is mediated by an altered penicillin-binding protein (PBP2a), which is encoded by the mecA gene and confers resistance to most of the current β-lactam antimicrobial agents. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) infections account for 40-60% of all nosocomial (hospital acquired) S. aureus infections in many centers across the world. HCWs are likely to play a large role in MRSA transmission. Screening is a useful technique to identify the reservoir, initiate contact precautions and eradication measures. The conventional screening method is a multistep process. The chrome agar method is not only a single step process but also easier one. By this we save time and decrease the workload. This Cross-sectional Analytical study was carried out to look for the utility of chromogenic media as screening tool for early detection of MRSA strains from the nasal carriage of healthcare workers in tertiary care hospital in central India.
Methods: Thirty non repetitive samples each from four groups of health care provider i.e. Consultants, Residents, Nursing staff & Cleaning Staff were collected after informed consent and ethical clearance. Samples from anterior nares were processed for isolation of S. aureus and detection of MRSA by conventional and by Chromagar. Data maintained in Microsoft office Excel was analyzed with statistical tools like tests of proportion & Chi Square test for significance.
Results: By conventional method, out of 120 samples 68 were S. aureus of which 26(21.66%) were MRSA. Chrome agar detected 27(22.5%) MRSA. Time required for MRSA detection conventionally was 48 hours while by Chrome agar detection was in 24 hours for 24 (88.88%) isolates and 48 hours for 03 isolates.
Conclusion: Chrom agar MRSA is highly specific and sensitive to detect MRSA. In majority of cases MRSA detection was within 24 hours.
Keywords: Chrom agar, Nasal colonization, MRSA, PBP2a, Health care provider, Hospital Acquired Infections
Key Messages: The control and prevention of the infection ascribed to MRSA can only be achieved when there is a regular screening of carriers among healthcare providers thus preventing the spread of MRSA in hospital settings as well as community. Chrome agar can be a better option to conventional method as it is highly sensitive and specific and time saving.
References
1. Collee JG, Fraser AG, Marmion BP, Simmons A, Mackie and McCartney. Practical Medical Microbiology. 14 th ed. Churchill Livingstone, Elsevier. New Delhi, 2006. p. 245-6.
2. Williams RE. Healthy carriage of Staphylococcus aureus: Its prevalence and importance. Bacteriol Rev 1963;27:56-71.
3. Ridley M. Perineal carriage of Staph. aureus. Br Med J 1959;1:270-3.
4. Guinan ME, Dan BB, Guidotti RJ, Reingold AL, Schmid GP, Bettoli EJ, et al. Vaginal colonization with Staphylococcus aureus in healthy women: A review of four studies. Ann Intern Med 1982;96:944-7.
5. Lowy FD. Staphylococcus aureus infect-ions. N Engl J Med 1998;339:520-32.
6. Brown DF, Edwards DI, Hawkey EM, Morrison D, Ridgway GL (2005). Guidelines for the laboratory diagnosis and susceptibility testing of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J.Antimicrob.Chemother. 56: 1000-1018.
7. Palavecino E. Clinical, epidemiological, and laboratory as- pects of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections. Methods in Molecular Biology, 2007, 391:1–19.
8. Fluit AC, Wielders CL, Verhoef J, Schmitz FJ. Epidemiology and suscept-ibility of 3,051 Staphylococcus aureus isolates from 25 university hospitals participating in the European SENTRY study. J Clin Microbiol 2001;39:3727-32.
9. Albrich WC, Harbarth S. Health-care workers: source, vector, or victim of MRSA? Lancet Infect Dis 2008;8:289-301
10. Dr. Newson louise, Dr. Knott laurence. MRSA. http://patient.info/health/mrsa-leaflet (accessed 22-01-2016).
11. Dr. Steckelberg james. MRSA:Protecting student athelets. http://www.mayoclinic-.org/diseases-conditions/mrsa/in-depth/mrsa/art-20047876?pg=1 (accessed 22-01-2016)
12. DJ Diekema, M Climo. Preventing MRSA infections: finding it is not enough. JAMA 2008; 299:11901192
13. J. C Lucet , B Regnier. Screening and Decolonization: Does Methicillin Suscep-tible Staphylococcus aureus Hold Lessons for Methicillin-Resistant S. aureus? Clin. Infect. Dis. 2010; 51(5):585590
14. (23-Dec 2015), Available at: http://w-ww.chromagar.com/clinical-microbiology-chromagar-mrsa-focus-on-mrsa-28.html#.WAFkSijwnzA (Accessed: ).
15. Sharon Rainy Rongpharpi, Naba Kumar Hazarika, and Hitesh Kalita () , Available at:. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/-pmc/articles/PMC3592287/ (Accessed: 13th October 2016).
16. Radhakrishna M, Monalisa D’Souza, Subbannayya Kotigadde, Vishwas Saralaya K, and Shashidar Kotian M () , Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.-gov/pmc/articles/PMC3919305/ (Accessed: 13th October 2016).
17. Rudrakshi Singh, Navinchandra M. Kaore (), Available at: https://www.innovativepublication.com/admin/uploaded_files/IJMR_3%282%29_93-98.pdf (Accessed: 13th October 2016).
18. AA Poojary and LD Bhandarkar () , Available at: http://www.ijcmas.com/vol-4-4/AA%20Poojary%20and%20LD%2-0Bhandarkar.pdf (Accessed: 13th October 2016)
19. F.E. Hardic, A. W. Pasculle, C.A. Muto (), Available at: https://www.bd.com-/ds/technicalCenter/whitepapers/lr222707.pdf (Accessed: 13th October 2016).
20. Bram Diederen, Inge van Duijn, Alex van Belkum, Piet Willemse, Peter van Keulen, and Jan Kluytmans () , Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7921578_Performance_of_CHROMagar_MRSA_Medium_for_detection_of_Methicillin-resistant (Accessed: 13th October 2016).
21. Collee.J, Fraser.A, Marmion.B, Simmons. A. Mackie & McCartney Practical Medical Microbiology, 14(ed),21, 387-98
22. National Committee for Clinical Labo-ratory Standards.Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing ;24th informational supplement Wayne, Pa:National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards;2014(M100-S24).
23. Moghadam SO, Pourmand MR & Da-Voodabadi. The Detection of Mupirocin Resistance and Nasal Carriage of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus among Healthcare Workers at University Hospitals of Tehran, Iran. Iran J Public Health, Vol. 44, No.3, Mar 2015, pp.361-368
24. Kakhandki LS and Peerapur BV. Study of nasal carriage of MRSA among the clinical staff and health care workers of a teaching hospital of Karnataka, India. Al Ameen J Med Sc i 2012; 5(4) : 367-370
25. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268508383_Kaur_DC_Narayan_PA_Kaur_DC_Narayan_PA_Mupirocin_resistance_in_nasal_carriage_of_Staphylococcus_aureus_among_healthcare_workers_of_a_tertiary_care_rural_hospital_Indian_J_Crit_Care_Med_201418716-21