Cited by 111Antimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusInfection Control in HealthcareAntibiotic Use and Resistance

A systematic review of the evidence for interventions for the prevention and control of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (1996–2004): report to the Joint MRSA Working Party (Subgroup A).

Loveday, H.P., Pellowe, C.M., Jones, S.R.L.J., Pratt, R.J.·2006·Journal of Hospital Infection

Abstract

A systematic review was undertaken of the evidence published between 1996 and 2004 on the effectiveness, and associated economic costs, of a range of interventions to prevent and control the transmission of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in hospital settings. The review questions focused on screening, patient isolation, use of decolonization strategies, feedback of surveillance data, and environmental hygiene interventions. The reviewers assessed evidence from four recent systematic reviews, 24 non-experimental descriptive studies, five economic evaluations and one recently revised international guideline. The methodological quality of studies retrieved was such that there is currently insufficient high-quality evidence for infection prevention and control interventions in the fields identified for this review. However, evidence from clinically based, non-experimental studies does provide support for the continued use of a range and combination of interventions that contribute to the prevention and control of MRSA within acute hospitals and long-term-care settings. Well-conducted economic evaluations reporting the economic benefits arising from infection prevention and control interventions are lacking.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jhin.2006.01.002

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Loveday, H. P., Pellowe, C. M., Jones, S. R. L. J., & Pratt, R. J.
Affiliations
University of West London (GB)
Corresponding author
Pratt, R.J.
Venue
Journal of Hospital Infection
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-05
Volume
63
Pages
S45-S70
ISSN
0195-6701 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2078466069
Cited by
111
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
FWCI
1.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Hospital Infection (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Government of the United Kingdom
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Infection Control in Healthcare
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology › Antibiotic Use and Resistance
Keywords
methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, MRSA transmission, infection control, hospital settings, screening, patient isolation, decolonization, environmental hygiene, economic evaluation, long-term care, acute care hospitals
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross Infection, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Isolation, Staphylococcal Infections, Staphylococcus aureus, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Methicillin Resistance, Infection Control, Guidelines as Topic

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