A Novel Approach to Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) Screening of Colonized Patients

NCT ID: NCT01234831

Last Updated: 2017-10-31

Study Results

Results available

Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.

View full results

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

463 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2010-12-31

Study Completion Date

2016-03-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is endemic in hospital settings. Colonization with MRSA puts patients at increased risk for invasive infections, and MRSA infections have been associated with high costs and adverse clinic outcomes. Patients can clear MRSA spontaneously. Improved approaches for identifying patients who are no longer colonized are needed; we hypothesize that more sensitive nucleic acid amplification can be used to improve identification of patients who are no longer colonized.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Compared with patients with methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) bacteremia, patients with MRSA bacteremia remained in the hospital for two more days on average and had a median attributable increment in hospital charges of approximately $7000.

MRSA status is a determinant of bed allocation, especially in shared-room settings, which represent the most common organization in the US and globally. Based on guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, once patients are designated as having had a positive MRSA culture (either colonized or from a clinical isolate), they require Contact Precautions. This requirement translates into either cohorting with other patients with similar precautions status (i.e., two patients with MRSA share a room) or placement in a private room in the hospital. Cohorting is not the preferred infection control method, but in shared-room settings, it is the most common scenario, particularly in hospitals with high occupancy.

Individuals can clear MRSA colonization spontaneously. In fact, up to 38% of patients with MRSA-positive cultures taken greater than 3 months prior were found to be MRSA-negative during a re-screening program conducted by the Massachusetts General Hospital Infection Control Unit from 2004-2006. Other studies have demonstrated that a majority of patients are likely to clear colonization at various time points from original documentation of MRSA infection or colonization. There is currently no standardized approach or accepted guidelines for addressing screening for clearance of colonization in the growing pool of patients who have previous MRSA colonization/infection. Many organizations do provide guidelines for screening, but these guidelines are not based on rigorous study, have a variety of permutations, and have neither consensus acceptance nor adequate implementation among the medical community.

The status quo limits bed availability and delays patient discharge to rehabilitation facilities, adversely affecting quality and efficiency, and resulting in use of additional hospital resources. In addition to problems associated with patient flow for admissions and discharges, precaution status results in additional disruptions of patient care through "bed moves" to accommodate the use of shared rooms by like patients needing Contact Precautions.

A patient's precaution status affects his/her care from admission through discharge. During pre-admission, patients identified as previously having MRSA are affected by bed shortages and delays to admission while in emergency departments. While admitted, under current practices, patients who have in fact cleared MRSA may be cohorted with those who have active infection or persistent colonization, putting them at risk of recolonization and hospital acquired infection (HAI). Finally, patients who are on precautions for MRSA often have delayed discharge to rehabilitation or nursing facilities because of bed constraints similar to those experienced by acute care facilities.

We hypothesize that the use of more sensitive Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) methods detecting MRSA in nasal swabs can facilitate identification of true negative patients and can reliably do so with a single negative test in a shorter period of time, thereby greatly facilitating the ability to complete testing on a larger proportion of patients.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

MRSA Colonization

Keywords

Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.

MRSA colonization nucleic acid amplification chromogenic agar

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

DIAGNOSTIC

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Active Screening

Patients randomized to active screening will have two nasal swabs collected daily for 3 days, for both nucleic acid amplification and culture (CHROMagar)assays.

Group Type OTHER

nucleic acid amplification of nasal swab; nasal swab culture

Intervention Type DEVICE

Nasal swab is performed and analyzed using nucleic acid amplification to determine the presence or absence of MRSA DNA. One nasal swab is performed each day for three consecutive days during hospitalization.

Passive Screening

Patients randomized to passive screening will not actively be identified for testing but may be tested using culture-based algorithm by care team.

Group Type OTHER

Nasal swab culture

Intervention Type OTHER

Nasal swabs are obtained if the clinician caring for the patient identifies the patient as eligible to be screened for colonization. An algorithm for screening eligible patients is available electronically as part of the patient's standard medical record to the clinicians providing care.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

nucleic acid amplification of nasal swab; nasal swab culture

Nasal swab is performed and analyzed using nucleic acid amplification to determine the presence or absence of MRSA DNA. One nasal swab is performed each day for three consecutive days during hospitalization.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Nasal swab culture

Nasal swabs are obtained if the clinician caring for the patient identifies the patient as eligible to be screened for colonization. An algorithm for screening eligible patients is available electronically as part of the patient's standard medical record to the clinicians providing care.

Intervention Type OTHER

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Cepheid Xpert MRSA BD CHROMagar BD CHROMagar

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* age \> 18
* last positive MRSA culture greater than 3 months old
* admitted to hospital

Exclusion Criteria

* age \< 18
* last positive MRSA culture less than or equal to 3 months old
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Massachusetts General Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Erica S. Shenoy

Assistant Chief, Infection Control Unit

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

David C Hooper, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Massachusetts General Hospital

Erica S Shenoy, MD, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Massachusetts General Hospital

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Massachusetts General Hospital

Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Shenoy ES, Noubary F, Kim J, Rosenberg ES, Cotter JA, Lee H, Walensky RP, Hooper DC. Concordance of PCR and culture from nasal swabs for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a setting of concurrent antistaphylococcal antibiotics. J Clin Microbiol. 2014 Apr;52(4):1235-7. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02972-13. Epub 2014 Jan 22.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 24452168 (View on PubMed)

Shenoy ES, Kim J, Rosenberg ES, Cotter JA, Lee H, Walensky RP, Hooper DC. Discontinuation of contact precautions for methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus: a randomized controlled trial comparing passive and active screening with culture and polymerase chain reaction. Clin Infect Dis. 2013 Jul;57(2):176-84. doi: 10.1093/cid/cit206. Epub 2013 Apr 9.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 23572482 (View on PubMed)

Related Links

Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23572482

Clin Infect Dis 2013 May 10. \[Epub ahead of print\]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24452168

J Clin Microbiol. 2014 Apr;52(4):1235-7. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02972-13. Epub 2014 Jan 22.

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

2010P001336

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id