Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2014 Aug;142(8):1727-36.
doi: 10.1017/S095026881300280X. Epub 2013 Nov 13.

Comparison of air samples, nasal swabs, ear-skin swabs and environmental dust samples for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in pig herds

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of air samples, nasal swabs, ear-skin swabs and environmental dust samples for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in pig herds

Y Agersø et al. Epidemiol Infect. 2014 Aug.

Abstract

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Predicted values for the sensitivity on dust and air sampling at various within-herd prevalences. The prediction is based on logistic regression models using data from herds with at least one MRSA-positive sample of nasal swabs, air or dust samples.

References

    1. Guardabassi L, Stegger M, Skov R. Retrospective detection of methicillin resistant and susceptible Staphylococcus aureus ST398 in Danish slaughter pigs. Veterinary Microbiology 2007; 122: 384–386. - PubMed
    1. Lewis HC, et al. Pigs as source of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus CC398 infections in humans, Denmark. Emerging Infectious Diseases 2008; 14: 1383–1389. - PMC - PubMed
    1. EFSA. Analysis of the baseline survey on the prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in holdings with breeding pigs, in the EU, 2008 (1) – Part A: MRSA prevalence estimates EFSA Journal 2009; 7: 1376 (82 pp.).
    1. Agersø Y, et al. Study of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in Danish pigs at slaughter and in imported retail meat reveals a novel MRSA type in slaughter pigs. Veterinary Microbiology 2012; 157: 246–250. - PubMed
    1. DANMAP 2010. Use of antimicrobial agents and occurrence of antimicrobial resistance in bacteria from food animals, foods and humans in Denmark (http://www.DANMAP.org). Accessed 4 December 2012.

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances