Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 183

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Excess Costs and Utilization Associated with Methicillin Resistance for Patients with Staphylococcus aureus Infection

Filice, Gregory A., Nyman, John A., Lexau, Catherine, Lees, Christine H., Bockstedt, Lindsay A., Como-Sabetti, Kathryn, Lesher, Lindsey J., Lynfield, Ruth·2010·Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology

Abstract

Objective.: To determine differences in healthcare costs between cases of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infection and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) infection in adults. Design.: Retrospective study of all cases of S. aureus infection. Setting.: Department of Veterans Affairs hospital and associated clinics. Patients.: There were 390 patients with MSSA infections and 335 patients with MRSA infections. Methods.: We used medical records, accounting systems, and interviews to identify services rendered and costs for Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center patients with S. aureus infection with onset during the period from January 1, 2004, through June 30, 2006. We used regression analysis to adjust for patient characteristics. Results.: Median 6-month unadjusted costs for patients infected with MRSA were $34,657, compared with $15,923 for patients infected with MSSA. Patients with MRSA infection had more comorbidities than patients with MSSA infection (mean Charlson index 4.3 vs 3.2; P < .001). For patients with Charlson indices of 3 or less, mean adjusted 6-month costs derived from multivariate analysis were $51,252 (95% CI, $46,041–$56,464) for MRSA infection and $30,158 (95% CI, $27,092–$33,225) for MSSA infection. For patients with Charlson indices of 4 or more, mean adjusted costs were $84,436 (95% CI, $79,843–$89,029) for MRSA infection and $59,245 (95% CI, $56,016–$62,473) for MSSA infection. Patients with MRSA infection were also more likely to die than were patients with MSSA infection (23.6% vs 11.5%; P < .001). MRSA infection was more likely to involve the lungs, bloodstream, and urinary tract, while MSSA infection was more likely to involve bones or joints; eyes, ears, nose, or throat; surgical sites; and skin or soft tissue (P < .001). Conclusions.: Resistance to methicillin in S. aureus was independently associated with increased costs. Effective antimicrobial stewardship and infection prevention programs are needed to prevent these costly infections.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/651094

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 183

Metadata

Authors
Filice, G. A., Nyman, J. A., Lexau, C., Lees, C. H., Bockstedt, L. A., Como-Sabetti, K., Lesher, L. J., & Lynfield, R.
Venue
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology
Published
2010-04
Volume
31
Issue
4
Pages
365-373
ISSN
  • 0899-823X (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-6834
OpenAlex
W2115445941
Cited by
183
References
1
FWCI
7.49
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: Excess Costs and Utilization Associated with Methicillin Resistance for Patients with Staphylococcus aureus Infection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/651094
The paper
Filice, G. A., Nyman, J. A., Lexau, C., Lees, C. H., Bockstedt, L. A., Como-Sabetti, K., Lesher, L. J., & Lynfield, R. (2010). Excess Costs and Utilization Associated with Methicillin Resistance for Patients with Staphylococcus aureus Infection. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1086/651094

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.