Environmental Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a Veterinary Teaching Hospital During a Nonoutbreak Period
Environmental Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a Veterinary Teaching Hospital During a Nonoutbreak Period
复制标题
DOI：
10.1089/vbz.2010.0181
复制
发表时间：
2011-06-01
影响因子：
2.1
通讯作者：
Wittum, Thomas E.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hoet, Armando E.;Johnson, Amanda;Wittum, Thomas E.
在报道兽医环境中耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌（MRSA）的人畜共患和医院传播的同时，最近的证据表明，兽医医院的环境可能是MRSA的潜在来源。本报告是一项横断面研究，旨在确定非疫情期间某大型兽医院特定人类和动物接触表面上MRSA的流行情况。从小动物、马和食用动物区使用swiffer (R)或预湿拭子共收集了156个样本。通过预富集培养和标准微生物学程序，包括在添加NaCl和oxacillin的穆勒-辛顿琼脂上生长，以及检测mecA基因，分离和鉴定MRSA。测定葡萄球菌染色体盒型mec （SCCmec）分型和脉冲场凝胶电泳图谱。12%（19/157）的医院环境检出MRSA。MRSA在小动物、马和食用动物地区的患病率分别为16%、4%和0%。从小动物切片分离的16株MRSA被归类为USA100， SCCmec II型，其中2株的脉冲场凝胶电泳图谱不符合任何已知的类型。从马切片获得的1株分离物被分类为USA500， SCCmec IV型。分子流行病学分析显示，该院流行的MRSA分离物群体非常多样化；然而，在某些情况下，多个地点/表面，没有直接关联，有相同的MRSA克隆。在动物和人类接触表面之间，在流行率和分离株类型方面未观察到显著差异。许多人（门）和病人（车）接触的表面经常被MRSA污染。这项研究的结果表明，即使在非爆发时期，MRSA也存在于环境中。本研究还确定了兽医环境中在设计和执行感染控制程序时需要针对的特定表面。
Concurrent to reports of zoonotic and nosocomial transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in veterinary settings, recent evidence indicates that the environment in veterinary hospitals may be a potential source of MRSA. The present report is a cross-sectional study to determine the prevalence of MRSA on specific human and animal contact surfaces at a large veterinary hospital during a nonoutbreak period. A total of 156 samples were collected using Swiffers (R) or premoistened swabs from the small animal, equine, and food animal sections. MRSA was isolated and identified by pre-enrichment culture and standard microbiology procedures, including growth on Mueller-Hinton agar supplemented with NaCl and oxacillin, and by detection of the mecA gene. Staphylococcal chromosome cassette mec (SCCmec) typing and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis profile were also determined. MRSA was detected in 12% (19/157) of the hospital environments sampled. The prevalence of MRSA in the small animal, equine, and food animal areas were 16%, 4%, and 0%, respectively. Sixteen of the MRSA isolates from the small animal section were classified as USA100, SCCmec type II, two of which had pulsed-field gel electrophoresis pattern that does not conform to any known type. The one isolate obtained from the equine section was classified as USA500, SCCmec type IV. The molecular epidemiological analysis revealed a very diverse population of MRSA isolates circulating in the hospital; however, in some instances, multiple locations/surfaces, not directly associated, had the same MRSA clone. No significant difference was observed between animal and human contact surfaces in regard to prevalence and type of isolates. Surfaces touched by multiple people (doors) and patients (carts) were frequently contaminated with MRSA. The results from this study indicate that MRSA is present in the environment even during nonoutbreak periods. This study also identified specific surfaces in a veterinary environment that need to be targeted when designing and executing infection control programs.