Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 230

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systematic review of isolation policies in the hospital management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a review of the literature with epidemiological and economic modelling

Open access
Cooper, B, Stone, S, Kibbler, C, Cookson, B, Roberts, J, Medley, G, Duckworth, G, Lai, R, Ebrahim, S·2003·Health Technology Assessment

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence for the effectiveness of different isolation policies and screening practices in reducing the incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonisation and infection in hospital in-patients. To develop transmission models to study the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of isolation policies in controlling MRSA. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library and SIGLE (1966-2000). Hand-searching key journals. No language restrictions. REVIEW METHODS: Key data were extracted from articles reporting MRSA-related outcomes and describing an isolation policy in a hospital with epidemic or endemic MRSA. No quality restrictions were imposed on studies using isolation wards (IW) or nurse cohorting (NC). Other studies were included if they were prospective or employed planned comparisons of retrospective data. Stochastic and deterministic models investigated long-term transmission dynamics, studying the effect of a fixed capacity IW, producing economic evaluations using local cost data. RESULTS: A total of 46 studies were accepted: 18 IWs, 9 NC, 19 other isolation policies. Most were interrupted time series, with few planned formal prospective studies. All but one reported multiple interventions. Consideration of potential confounders, measures to prevent bias, and appropriate statistical analysis were mostly lacking. No conclusions could be drawn in a third of studies. Most others provided evidence consistent with reduction of MRSA acquisition. Six long interrupted time series provided the strongest evidence. Four of these provided evidence that intensive control measures which included patient isolation were effective in controlling MRSA. In two others IW use failed to prevent endemic MRSA. There was no robust economic evaluation. Models showed that improving the detection rate or ensuring adequate isolation capacity reduced endemic levels, with substantial savings achievable. CONCLUSIONS: Major methodological weaknesses and inadequate reporting in published research mean that many plausible alternative explanations for reductions in MRSA acquisition associated with interventions cannot be excluded. No well-designed studies allow the role of isolation measures alone to be assessed. Nonetheless, there is evidence that concerted efforts that include isolation can reduce MRSA even when endemic. Little evidence was found to suggest that current isolation measures recommended in the UK are ineffective, and these should continue to be applied until further research establishes otherwise. The studies with the strongest evidence, together with the results of the modelling, provide testable hypotheses for future research. Guidelines to facilitate design of future research are produced.

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 · 10.3310/hta7390

Cites

3 of 3 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

Cited by

See all 230

Metadata

Authors
Cooper, B., Stone, S., Kibbler, C., Cookson, B., Roberts, J., Medley, G., Duckworth, G., Lai, R., & Ebrahim, S.
Venue
Health Technology Assessment
Published
2003-12
Volume
7
Issue
39
Pages
1-194
ISSN
  • 1366-5278 (ISSN-L)
  • 2046-4924
OpenAlex
W1988516867
Cited by
230
References
3
FWCI
1.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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: Systematic review of isolation policies in the hospital management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a review of the literature with epidemiological and economic modelling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3310/hta7390
The paper
Cooper, B., Stone, S., Kibbler, C., Cookson, B., Roberts, J., Medley, G., Duckworth, G., Lai, R., & Ebrahim, S. (2003). Systematic review of isolation policies in the hospital management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a review of the literature with epidemiological and economic modelling. Health Technology Assessment. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta7390

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.