A risk score for identifying methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in patients presenting to the hospital with pneumonia
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) represents an important pathogen in healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP). The concept of HCAP, though, may not perform well as a screening test for MRSA and can lead to overuse of antibiotics. We developed a risk score to identify patients presenting to the hospital with pneumonia unlikely to have MRSA. METHODS: We identified patients admitted with pneumonia (Apr 2005-Mar 2009) at 62 hospitals in the US. We only included patients with lab evidence of bacterial infection (e.g., positive respiratory secretions, blood, or pleural cultures or urinary antigen testing). We determined variables independently associated with the presence of MRSA based on logistic regression (two-thirds of cohort) and developed a risk prediction model based on these factors. We validated the model in the remaining population. RESULTS: The cohort included 5975 patients and MRSA was identified in 14%. The final risk score consisted of eight variables and a potential total score of 10. Points were assigned as follows: two for recent hospitalization or ICU admission; one each for age < 30 or > 79 years, prior IV antibiotic exposure, dementia, cerebrovascular disease, female with diabetes, or recent exposure to a nursing home/long term acute care facility/skilled nursing facility. This study shows how the prevalence of MRSA rose with increasing score after stratifying the scores into Low (0 to 1 points), Medium (2 to 5 points) and High (6 or more points) risk. When the score was 0 or 1, the prevalence of MRSA was < 10% while the prevalence of MRSA climbed to > 30% when the score was 6 or greater. CONCLUSIONS: MRSA represents a cause of pneumonia presenting to the hospital. This simple risk score identifies patients at low risk for MRSA and in whom anti-MRSA therapy might be withheld.
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
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.
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?
Patient-related risk factors for MRSA include prior MRSA infection or colonisation, recent IV antibiotics, recurrent skin infections or chronic wounds, invasive devices, haemodialysis, recent hospital admissions, and severity of illness.
“Patient-related risk factors for MRSA include prior history of MRSA infection or colonisation, recent IV antibiotics, history of recurrent skin infections or chronic wounds, presence of invasive devices, haemodialysis, recent hospital admissions and severity of illness [136, 138–142].”
From Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021 (2021) · cites this paper as [140]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 18 · Cited by 84
- Authors
- Shorr, A. F., Myers, D. E., Huang, D. B., Nathanson, B. H., Emons, M. F., & Kollef, M. H.
- Affiliations
- MedStar Washington Hospital Center (US)
- Pfizer (United States) (US)
- Cerner (United States) (US)
- Washington University in St. Louis (US)
- Corresponding author
- Shorr, Andrew F
- Venue
- BMC Infectious Diseases
- Published
- 2013-06-06
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 268-268
- ISSN
- 1471-2334 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3681572
- OpenAlex
- W2148718994
- Cited by
- 84
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 7.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- BMC Infectious Diseases (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Digital Commons@Becker (Washington University School of Medicine) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Pfizer
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Pneumonia and Respiratory Infections
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology › Antibiotic Use and Resistance
- Keywords
- methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, healthcare-associated pneumonia, risk score, MRSA screening, pneumonia, risk prediction model, antibiotic stewardship, MRSA prevalence, risk factors
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross Infection, Female, Hospitalization, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pneumonia, Pneumonia, Staphylococcal, Retrospective Studies, Risk, United States, Prevalence, Logistic Models, Community-Acquired Infections, Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus
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