You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 300 No. 5, August 6, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Related letters
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Bacterial Infections
 •Infectious Diseases, Other
 •Quality of Care
 •Patient Safety/ Medical Error
 •Quality of Care, Other
 •Surgery
 •Surgical Physiology
 •Surgical Infections
 •Screening
 •Drug Therapy
 •Drug Therapy, Other
 •Infectious Diseases
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Universal Screening for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus by Hospitals—Reply

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In Reply: Dr Harris raises an important point for US hospitals. However, incentives for hospitals differ, and our institution's decision to invest in screening was not driven by a desire to protect reimbursement from Swiss insurance companies, but rather an attempt to improve patient safety and reduce the overall cost burden of MRSA.

The letters by Dr Salgado and colleagues and Drs Jarvis and Muto raise methodological limitations that were discussed in our study. In contrast to the simultaneously published time-series analysis by Robicsek et al,1 our study focused on screening of patients in surgical wards and was performed in a setting with low MRSA infection rates, a preexisting screening and decolonization policy for known carriers, and compliance with hand hygiene recommendations markedly above usual standards,2 thus making it less likely to observe an added effect of general screening. Similar to our findings, a recent cluster-randomized crossover trial from the . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Stephan Harbarth, MD, MS
stephan.harbarth@hcuge.ch

Didier Pittet, MD, MS
Infection Control Program
University of Geneva Hospitals and Medical School
Geneva, Switzerland



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Universal Screening for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus at Hospital Admission and Nosocomial Infection in Surgical Patients
Stephan Harbarth, Carolina Fankhauser, Jacques Schrenzel, Jan Christenson, Pascal Gervaz, Catherine Bandiera-Clerc, Gesuele Renzi, Nathalie Vernaz, Hugo Sax, and Didier Pittet
JAMA. 2008;299(10):1149-1157.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED LETTERS

Universal Screening for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus by Hospitals
Rosemary Harris
JAMA. 2008;300(5):503.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Universal Screening for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus by Hospitals
Cassandra D. Salgado, Margreet C. Vos, and Barry M. Farr
JAMA. 2008;300(5):503-504.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Universal Screening for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus by Hospitals
William R. Jarvis and Carlene Muto
JAMA. 2008;300(5):504.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Universal Screening for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus by Hospitals—Reply
Daniel J. Diekema and Michael Climo
JAMA. 2008;300(5):505-506.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2008 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.