Decreases in health care–related isolates accounted for all reductions in MRSA during 2007–2010.
Medscape, LLC is pleased to provide online continuing medical education (CME) for this journal article, allowing clinicians the opportunity to earn CME credit.
This activity has been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education through the joint sponsorship of Medscape, LLC and Emerging Infectious Diseases. Medscape, LLC is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
Medscape, LLC designates this Journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1
All other clinicians completing this activity will be issued a certificate of participation. To participate in this journal CME activity: (1) review the learning objectives and author disclosures; (2) study the education content; (3) take the post-test with a 70% minimum passing score and complete the evaluation at
Upon completion of this activity, participants will be able to:
Identify the most common classification of MRSA recorded in 2001 to 2010
Evaluate the epidemiology of MRSA between 2001 and 2010
Distinguish the classification of MRSA which increased between 2001 and 2010
Analyze the bacteriology of MRSA infections in the current study
We examined trends in incidence of methicillin-resistant
Methicillin-resistant
In the late 1990s, the Emerging Infections Program (EIP), funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), became interested in better defining MRSA dynamics from a population-based perspective and established pilot surveillance systems at sites in 4 states for either all MRSA infections (Minnesota, Georgia, Maryland) or for invasive disease (Connecticut) (
Since 2004, health care–associated infections have received increasing national attention. Efforts by patients’ advocate groups beginning in 2004 have resulted in the passage of legislation mandating that hospitals report infections to their state health department in 27 states, and in at least 12 states, legislation related to MRSA reporting, screening, or producing MRSA infection control plans (
Connecticut began population-based surveillance for invasive MRSA infection in 2001, thus providing an opportunity to examine trends over a 10-year period. Our objectives in this analysis were twofold: 1) to describe the epidemiology of invasive MRSA in Connecticut and trends over time by place of illness onset (community vs. hospital) and relationship to health care, and 2) to describe MRSA strain subtypes associated with place of onset and trends over time.
Connecticut participates in the Active Bacterial Core Surveillance project of the EIP at CDC. As part of this surveillance project, statewide active surveillance for invasive MRSA began in 2001. A case of invasive MRSA infection was defined as isolation of MRSA from a normally sterile body site (per Active Bacterial Core Surveillance protocol) (
Medical chart reviews were conducted for hospitalized patients by using a standardized case report form. Data collected included demographics, infection type, underlying illnesses, and risk factors for infection as described below.
Cases were classified into 3 mutually exclusive categories according to place of onset and relationship to health care. Hospital-onset (HO) MRSA cases were those for which cultures were collected >2 days after hospital admission (day of admission = day 0). Health care–associated community-onset (HACO) cases were those for which cultures were collected from outpatients or
Connecticut is divided into 169 towns. Large towns were defined as those with a population
From April 1, 2005, through December 31, 2010, a sample of MRSA isolates from blood was systematically collected from 8 sentinel hospital laboratories (2 high-volume, 6 medium-volume hospitals). These laboratories represented 4 metropolitan areas. Isolates were only collected from specimens from case-patients who resided in towns in which >90% of residents received health care at 1 of the 8 hospitals. In 3 metropolitan areas, all available blood isolates were collected. In the fourth area, with both high-volume participating hospitals, collection was limited to 3 blood isolates per month from each laboratory.
Isolates were submitted to the Connecticut Department of Public Health Laboratory for confirmation of
Isolates were subtyped by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) with the restriction endonuclease
Incidence rates by year were calculated by using US Census Bureau yearly population estimates, except for 2010, for which the 2010 census counts were used. Rates were calculated overall for each MRSA category and for strata defined by age and race/ethnicity within the categories. Rates for HO MRSA were also calculated by using hospital specific resident bed-days as reported to the Connecticut Office of Health Care Access for 2001–2009. For 2010, bed-days from 2009 were used because 2010 data were not available. One hospital was excluded from the bed-day analysis because that facility does not report patient bed-days to the Office of Health Care Access.
Analyses were performed using SAS version 9.2 (SAS Institute. Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Percentages of cases in different demographic categories were compared by using the χ2 test. Ten-year incidence trends were examined by using the χ2 test for linear trend. To examine changes in trends within the overall 10-year period, we analyzed trends by χ2 separately for 2001–2003, 2004–2006, and 2007–2010, in part because MRSA received substantial national publicity in 2007 after an article reported incidence at EIP sites (
The incidence of MRSA overall and average annual incidence rates by each of the 3 categories are reported in
| Demographic characteristic | All MRSA | HO | HACO | CA | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. | Rate | No. | Rate | No. | Rate | No. | Rate | ||||
| Total | 8,758 | 25.2 | 2,753 | 7.9 | 5075 | 14.6 | 920 | 2.6 | |||
| Sex | |||||||||||
| M | 5,290 | 31.2 | 1,620 | 9.6 | 3,043 | 18.0 | 620 | 3.7 | |||
| F | 3,465 | 19.4 | 1,132 | 6.3 | 2,030 | 11.4 | 300 | 1.7 | |||
| Age-group, y | |||||||||||
| <18 | 127 | 1.5 | 65 | 0.8 | 25 | 0.3 | 37 | 0.4 | |||
| 18–34 | 379 | 5.3 | 115 | 1.6 | 148 | 2.1 | 116 | 1.6 | |||
| 35–49 | 1,082 | 13.0 | 308 | 3.8 | 529 | 6.4 | 244 | 2.9 | |||
| 50–64 | 1,955 | 31.4 | 642 | 10.3 | 1088 | 17.5 | 222 | 3.6 | |||
| 5,205 | 111.5 | 1,619 | 34.7 | 3,279 | 70.2 | 301 | 6.4 | ||||
| Race/ethnicity‡ | |||||||||||
| White, non-Hispanic | 4,649 | 25.6 | 1,338 | 7.4 | 2,765 | 15.2 | 537 | 3.0 | |||
| Black, non-Hispanic | 815 | 35.9 | 232 | 10.2 | 466 | 20.5 | 116 | 5.1 | |||
| Hispanic | 467 | 16.5 | 107 | 3.8 | 245 | 8.6 | 115 | 4.1 | |||
| Town size§ | |||||||||||
| Large | 1,930 | 31.6 | 597 | 9.8 | 1067 | 17.5 | 265 | 4.3 | |||
| Medium | 1,969 | 26.2 | 635 | 8.5 | 1,174 | 15.6 | 159 | 2.1 | |||
| Small | 4,841 | 22.9 | 1,511 | 7.1 | 2,826 | 13.3 | 496 | 2.3 | |||
*MRSA, methicillin-resistant
The descriptive epidemiology of HO, HACO, and CA MRSA infections had similarities and differences. For each, incidence was higher with increasing age, and in men, blacks, and large town residents (
The overall incidence of MRSA infections by year and the yearly rates for each of the 3 categories of MRSA are shown in
Incidence of methicillin-resistant
When we assessed which demographic groups were most and least affected by these changes during 2007–2010, we found the following. For all MRSA infections during 2007–2010, a decrease
We also examined incidence of HO MRSA infections by hospital volume (
| Hospital volume† | No. cases‡ | Annual average incidence rate (range)§ |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 2,563 | 13.6 (8.9–18.1) |
| High | 1,494 | 15.5 (10.1–23.3) |
| Medium | 797 | 12.1 (6.7–17.1) |
| Low | 272 | 10.1 (5.9–15.3) |
*MRSA, methicillin-resistant
Incidence of hospital-onset methicillin-resistant
We examined the percentage of all MRSA isolates from the leading isolation sites by MRSA category. Blood isolates were most common (89.1%), followed by joint isolates (6.0%) and bone isolates (2.7%). CA infections were less likely than either HO or HACO infections to have a sterile-site isolate from blood (79.9% vs.88.2% and 91.2%, p<0.0001 for each), but more likely to have an isolate from a joint (18% vs. 2.0 and 5.9%, p<0.0001 for each). When 10-year trends were examined for each isolate site and place of onset category, 2 trends (at 2 sites) were significant. Joint isolates increased for HO and HACO MRSA infections, from 1.5% in 2001 to 5.4% in 2010 (p = 0.002) and from 4.7% in 2001 to 8.5% in 2010 (p = 0.005), respectively.
During 2005–2010, a total of 616 case-patients had blood isolates tested by PFGE at CDC; 609 had PFGE types in the range of USA100 to USA1100, inclusive. Of all PFGE types, 93 (15.3%) were community strains, of which USA300 was predominant (82, 88.2%). A total of 516 (84.7%) were health care strains, of which USA100 was predominant (456, 88.4%). There were 91 CA, 369 HACO, and 149 HO cases (
| MRSA category and PFGE type | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | Total | p value, trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CA | ||||||||
| C strain | 5 (28) | 7 (47) | 3 (30) | 10 (63) | 11 (69) | 9 (56) | 45 (49) | 0.02 |
| H strain | 13 (72) | 8 (53) | 7 (70) | 6 (38) | 5 (31) | 7 (44) | 46 (51) | |
| HACO | ||||||||
| C strain | 5 (6) | 7 (9) | 4 (7) | 6 (11) | 7 (12) | 10 (21) | 39 (11) | 0.01 |
| H strain | 74 (94) | 67 (91) | 53 (93) | 49 (89) | 50 (88) | 37 (79) | 330 (89) | |
| HO | ||||||||
| C strain | 0 | 0 | 2 (6) | 3 (11) | 4 (21) | 0 | 9 (6) | 0.07 |
| H strain | 45 (100) | 5 (100) | 30 (94) | 26 (90) | 15 (79) | 19 (100) | 140 (94) | |
| HA | ||||||||
| C strain | 5 (4) | 7 (9) | 6 (7%) | 9 (11) | 11 (14) | 10 (15) | 48 (9) | 0.003 |
| H strain | 119 (96) | 72 (91) | 83 (83) | 75 (89) | 65 (86) | 56 (85) | 470 (91) |
*Values are no. (%). MRSA, methicillin-resistant
To estimate trends in incidence of MRSA due to community and to health care strains, we applied the percentages of each to statewide incidence of CA and of health care–associated MRSA for each year during 2005–2010 (
| MRSA category and PFGE type | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | Incidence difference, 2005–2010 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CA | |||||||
| Statewide incidence | 3.25 | 3.36 | 3.53 | 3.54 | 3.47 | 3.08 | −0.17 |
| % C strain‡ | 27.8 | 46.7 | 30.0 | 62.5 | 68.8 | 56.3 | |
| C strain incidence | 0.90 | 1.57 | 1.06 | 2.21 | 2.39 | 1.73 | +0.83 |
| H strain incidence | 2.35 | 1.79 | 2.47 | 1.33 | 1.08 | 1.35 | −1.00 |
| HA | |||||||
| Statewide incidence | 24.16 | 21.78 | 22.54 | 19.27 | 18.13 | 18.95 | −5.21 |
| % C strain | 4.0 | 8.9 | 6.7 | 10.7 | 14.5 | 15.2 | |
| C strain incidence | 0.97 | 1.93 | 1.52 | 2.06 | 2.62 | 2.87 | +1.90 |
| H strain incidence | 23.19 | 19.85 | 21.02 | 17.21 | 15.51 | 16.08 | −7.11 |
*MRSA, methicillin-resistant
Invasive MRSA infections comprise at least 2 distinct MRSA groups: those caused by strains that evolved and spread in hospitals over the past 4 decades, and those caused by strains that evolved in the community and ≈15 years ago began to spread widely, causing community and institutional outbreaks of skin and soft tissue infections (
At least 6 recently published large-scale studies have examined incidence trends in MRSA in the United States during various periods in the past decade (
The data from Connecticut during the same periods are consistent with those of other trends studies: CA MRSA was generally increasing from 2001 to 2007 (+158%), and HO and HACO MRSA decreased during 2005–2008 (−20% each). The additional years of data in Connecticut help clarify the situation for hospital and health care–associated infections before and after the EIP study and the situation for CA infections since 2007. HO MRSA infections appeared to begin to decrease during 2003–2004 and have remained on a downward trajectory since, while HACO infections appeared to be increasing during 2001–2004 and then began a generally downward trend. CA MRSA, after the large and generally continuous increase during 2001–2007, plateaued during 2007–2009 and then dropped 12.2% in 2010. The net effect of these varying trends on overall invasive MRSA infection has been an irregular, but net increase in, incidence during 2001–2007, and a large, persistent drop since 2007.
The typing data suggest that these varying trends in Connecticut can be connected. The subset of blood isolates typed during 2005–2010 showed that the percentages of all HO, HACO, and CA infections caused by community PFGE types are increasing, and those caused by health care–associated types are decreasing. When the percentages of community and health care–associated strains were applied to the statewide incidence of CA and of health care–associated MRSA for those years, statewide community-strain estimated incidence increased over time in each category, while statewide health care–associated strain estimated incidence decreased in each. Thus, the decrease in invasive MRSA infection can likely be explained by a reduction in disease incidence with health care–associated strains, while disease and, presumably, prevalence of community strains continue to increase.
Although our surveillance data analysis cannot directly address why health care strains and related invasive disease decreased while community strains and related disease did not, several explanations are possible. Since 2006, Connecticut laws have been passed that required the reporting of hospital infections and MRSA control policies in hospitals (
In contrast, controlling community strains that occur outside the hospital is not as easy. Although proactive control efforts in institutions, including correctional facilities and sports facilities, should minimize the potential for institutional outbreaks, much community transmission occurs outside such settings. Thus, one could expect the sustained prevalence and continued transmission of community strains in the community with regular introduction in proportion to their incidence into health care settings and that their proportion of all MRSA infections would increase.
Although our data show a plateauing of CA MRSA, they also suggest that the increasing incidence of infection with community strains, mostly USA300, in Connecticut, is not over. The plateau effect appears to be because the rate of decrease in infections caused by health care strains is now equal to the rate of increase in community strains. Future trends will be determined in part by the relative dynamics of these MRSA strains.
Our study has several strengths: in particular, the surveillance is population-based, complete, enhanced by regular audits of all Connecticut laboratories for MRSA isolates, and of 10 years’ duration. In addition, strain typing was performed on a subset of blood isolates.
However, this study also has several limitations. First, some HACO cases may have been misclassified as CA because only the most recent medical record was reviewed, and patients were not interviewed. Second, our data could have been influenced by trends in obtaining blood cultures from patients with fever, although we do not know whether a trend exists toward obtaining fewer blood cultures on acutely ill, febrile patients, most of whom need hospitalization. Third, the sample of isolates characterized was not random and may not be representative of the state as a whole. However, it was a systematic sample obtained from 4 metropolitan areas that had a collective MRSA epidemiology mirroring that of the state as a whole. Fourth, the hypothesis that the sharp drop in health care–related MRSA incidence beginning in 2008 may be due to a combination of hospital and public awareness raised in 2006 and 2007 is based on ecologic information only. We have not systematically reviewed hospital screening, isolation, hand washing, and other relevant policies and practices to determine whether they changed before MRSA began to decrease in each hospital. Fifth, CA-MRSA strains mainly cause skin and soft tissue infections. Although overall invasive disease appears to be decreasing, the replacement of health care–associated MRSA strains with community strains could result in an increase in noninvasive infections. Finally, the Connecticut experience may not be generalizable to other states or geographic regions with potentially different MRSA dynamics.
In summary, after 7 years of stable to increasing incidence, HA, HO, and CA MRSA all have been decreasing since 2007, coincident with increased public, public health, and hospital attention. The decrease appears to be entirely due to a decrease in incidence of infections caused by health care–related strains of MRSA. Continued monitoring is needed to assess the sustainability of the apparent prevention gains.
We thank Heather Altier and Carmen Marquez for assisting with gathering data over the 10 years. We also thank Gregory Fosheim and Valerie Schoonover for their help with categorizing MRSA isolates by PFGE and Scott Fridkin and James Meek for their helpful review of this article.
Dr Hadler is an associate professor at the Yale School of Public Health and senior epidemiologist with the Connecticut Emerging Infections Program. His primary research interests are conducting surveillance for, and reducing occurrence of, emerging infections of public health importance and describing disparities in occurrence using socioeconomic indicators.
To obtain credit, you should first read the journal article. After reading the article, you should be able to answer the following, related, multiple-choice questions. To complete the questions (with a minimum 70% passing score) and earn continuing medical education (CME) credit, please go to
A. Hospital onset (HO)
B. Health care-associated community onset (HACO)
C. Community-associated (CA)
D. Undefined
A. Younger patients
B. Non-Hispanic black patients
C. Hispanic patients
D. Residents of small towns
A. All MRSA cases
B. HO
C. HACO
D. CA
A. Blood isolates of MRSA were the most common infection
B. Joint isolates were more likely in HACO vs CA cases of MRSA
C. Most PFGE types were community strains of MRSA
D. The prevalence of community pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) types declined between 2005 and 2010
| 1. The activity supported the learning objectives. | ||||
| Strongly Disagree | Strongly Agree | |||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| 2. The material was organized clearly for learning to occur. | ||||
| Strongly Disagree | Strongly Agree | |||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| 3. The content learned from this activity will impact my practice. | ||||
| Strongly Disagree | Strongly Agree | |||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| 4. The activity was presented objectively and free of commercial bias. | ||||
| Strongly Disagree | Strongly Agree | |||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |