Skip Navigation

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 2009 64(Supplement 1):i11-i17; doi:10.1093/jac/dkp260
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pearson, A.
Right arrow Articles by Murray, M.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pearson, A.
Right arrow Articles by Murray, M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

This article appears in the following Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy issue: Aspects of Antimicrobial Resistance [View the issue table of contents]

Articles

Voluntary and mandatory surveillance for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) bacteraemia in England

Andrew Pearson*, Andrew Chronias and Miranda Murray

Health Protection Agency, Centre for Infections, 61 Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5EQ, UK


* Corresponding author. Tel: +44-208-327-7333; Fax: +44-208-205-9185; E-mail: andrew.pearson{at}hpa.org.uk

Voluntary laboratory reporting of communicable disease, including bacteraemia, has been the mainstay of surveillance in England for >30 years. The impact of introducing a parallel mandatory reporting process for surveillance of Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia [both methicillin susceptible (MSSA) and resistant (MRSA)] was assessed by national and regional comparison of MSSA and MRSA reports to the two surveillance systems. Introduction of mandatory reporting in 2001 demonstrated that the true number of cases was 40% higher than indicated by voluntary reporting (i.e. 60% case ascertainment by voluntary reporting). However by 2008 the difference in reporting of MRSA bacteraemia between the two systems dropped to 30%, with six of the nine health regions in England having improved their levels of voluntary reporting, although there was still under-reporting from London, the South East and the North West. Improvements in voluntary surveillance contributed to increased ascertainment of bacteraemia due to S. aureus (both MRSA and MSSA). Decreasing trends for MRSA bacteraemia were evident in both surveillance systems, with a 56% decrease in the mandatory and a 53% decline in the voluntary systems, from 2004. In contrast there was little change in reported cases of MSSA during 2004–2006. However, in 2007, when MRSA bacteraemia case numbers decreased by 27%, MSSA bacteraemia case reports actually increased by 6%. Trends for MSSA bacteraemia can be assessed more accurately from voluntary than from mandatory surveillance at the present time because mandatory reporting of MSSA bacteraemia is incomplete, with only 133 of 170 (78%) Trusts reporting in all four quarters of a year.

Keywords: nosocomial infection , Staphylococcus aureus , MSSA trends


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.