TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of air samples, nasal swabs, ear-skin swabs and environmental dust samples for detection of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in pig herds
AU - Agersø, Yvonne
AU - Vigre, Håkan
AU - Cavaco, Lina
AU - Josefsen, Mathilde Hasseldam
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - To identify a cost-effective and practical method for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in pig herds, the relative sensitivity of four sample types: nasal swabs, ear-skin (skin behind the ears) swabs, environmental dust swabs and air was compared. Moreover, dependency of sensitivity on within-herd prevalence was estimated. spa-typing was applied in order to study strain diversity. The sensitivity of one air sample was equal to the sensitivity of ten pools of five nasal swabs and relatively independent of within-herd prevalence [predicted to be nearly perfect (99%) for within-herd prevalence ⩾25%]. The results indicate that taking swabs of skin behind the ears (ten pools of five) was even more sensitive than taking nasal swabs (ten pools of five) at the herd level and detected significantly more positive samples. spa types t011, t034 and t4208 were observed. In conclusion, MRSA detection by air sampling is easy to perform, reduces costs and analytical time compared to existing methods, and is recommended for initial testing of herds. Ear-skin swab sampling may be more sensitive for MRSA detection than air sampling or nasal swab sampling.
AB - To identify a cost-effective and practical method for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in pig herds, the relative sensitivity of four sample types: nasal swabs, ear-skin (skin behind the ears) swabs, environmental dust swabs and air was compared. Moreover, dependency of sensitivity on within-herd prevalence was estimated. spa-typing was applied in order to study strain diversity. The sensitivity of one air sample was equal to the sensitivity of ten pools of five nasal swabs and relatively independent of within-herd prevalence [predicted to be nearly perfect (99%) for within-herd prevalence ⩾25%]. The results indicate that taking swabs of skin behind the ears (ten pools of five) was even more sensitive than taking nasal swabs (ten pools of five) at the herd level and detected significantly more positive samples. spa types t011, t034 and t4208 were observed. In conclusion, MRSA detection by air sampling is easy to perform, reduces costs and analytical time compared to existing methods, and is recommended for initial testing of herds. Ear-skin swab sampling may be more sensitive for MRSA detection than air sampling or nasal swab sampling.
U2 - 10.1017/S095026881300280X
DO - 10.1017/S095026881300280X
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 24229727
SN - 0950-2688
VL - 142
SP - 1727
EP - 1736
JO - Epidemiology and Infection
JF - Epidemiology and Infection
IS - 8
ER -