The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Burden of Staphylococcus aureus Infections on Hospitals in the United States: An Analysis of the 2000 and 2001 Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have investigated the impact of Staphylococcus aureus infections on individual hospitals, but to date, no study using nationally representative data has estimated this burden. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of the 2000 and 2001 editions of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, which represents a stratified 20% sample of hospitals in the United States. All inpatient discharge data from 994 hospitals in 28 states during 2000 and from 986 hospitals in 33 states during 2001, representing approximately 14 million inpatient stays, were analyzed to determine the association of S aureus infections with length of stay, total charges, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Staphylococcus aureus infection was reported as a discharge diagnosis for 0.8% of all hospital inpatients, or 292 045 stays per year. Inpatients with S aureus infection had, on average, 3 times the length of hospital stay (14.3 vs 4.5 days; P<.001), 3 times the total charges (48,824 US dollars vs 14,141 US dollars; P<.001), and 5 times the risk of in-hospital death (11.2% vs 2.3%; P<.001) than inpatients without this infection. Even when controlling for hospital fixed effects and for patient differences in diagnosis-related groups, age, sex, race, and comorbidities, the differences in mean length of stay, total charges, and mortality were significantly higher for hospitalizations associated with S aureus. CONCLUSIONS: Staphylococcus aureus infections represent a considerable burden to US hospitals, particularly among high-risk patient populations. The potential benefits to hospitals in terms of reduced use of resources and costs as well as improved outcomes from preventing S aureus infections are significant.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Liu, C., Bayer, A., Cosgrove, S. E., Daum, R. S., Fridkin, S. K., Gorwitz, R. J., Kaplan, S. L., Karchmer, A. W., Levine, D. P., Murray, B. E., et al. (2011) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/cid/cir034 · Cited by 1,599
Glance, L. G. (2011) · Archives of Surgery · doi:10.1001/archsurg.2011.41 · Cited by 218
Polymer‐Based Nitric Oxide Therapies: Recent Insights for Biomedical Applications
Jen, M. C., Serrano, M. C., van Lith, R., & Ameer, G. A. (2012) · Advanced Functional Materials · doi:10.1002/adfm.201101707 · Cited by 194
Palazzolo-Ballance, A. M., Reniere, M. L., Braughton, K. R., Sturdevant, D. E., Otto, M., Kreiswirth, B. N., Skaar, E. P., & DeLeo, F. R. (2008) · The Journal of Immunology · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.180.1.500 · Cited by 142
Role of Folate Antagonists in the Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Infection
Goldstein, E. J. C., & Proctor, R. A. (2008) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/525536 · Cited by 138
Metadata
- Authors
- Noskin, G. A., Rubin, R. J., Schentag, J. J., Kluytmans, J., Hedblom, E. C., Smulders, M., Lapetina, E., & Gemmen, E.
- Venue
- Archives of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2005-08-08
- Volume
- 165
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 1756
- ISSN
- 0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2134856487
- Cited by
- 299
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Burden of Staphylococcus aureus Infections on Hospitals in the United States: An Analysis of the 2000 and 2001 Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archinte.165.15.1756
- The paper
- Noskin, G. A., Rubin, R. J., Schentag, J. J., Kluytmans, J., Hedblom, E. C., Smulders, M., Lapetina, E., & Gemmen, E. (2005). The Burden of Staphylococcus aureus Infections on Hospitals in the United States: An Analysis of the 2000 and 2001 Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database. Archives of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.165.15.1756
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.