Comparative Study
Evaluation Studies
Journal Article
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Efficacy and acceptability of rectal and perineal sampling for identifying gastrointestinal colonization with extended spectrum β-lactamase Enterobacteriaceae.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated 'pre-laboratory' factors associated with the detection of extended spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-E) colonization including anatomical site, and staff and patient factors.

METHODS: All admissions to a large London hospital over 3 months were approached to provide rectal and perineal swabs, which were cultured for ESBL-E using chromogenic media. ESBL-E detection rates for patient- or staff-collected rectal or perineal swabs were compared using McNemar tests. Binary logistic regression was used to explore factors associated with patients declining to provide a rectal swab. The impact of simplifying the verbal study description to patients to improve the participation rate was evaluated.

RESULTS: Carriage of ESBL-E was significantly higher in rectal swabs than perineal swabs (7.8% of 4006 versus 3.8% of 4006, p <0.001), whether collected by staff or patients; 31.9% of 869 patients did not provide a rectal swab before the change in study description compared with 7.6% of 3690 patients afterwards (p <0.001). In multivariable analysis, factors associated with patients declining to provide a rectal swab were younger age (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.99-1.00), female gender (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.04-1.52), transfers from other hospitals (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.07-2.93) or an unknown admission route (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.09-2.37), being admitted before the change in study description (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.31-0.48), and the staff member who consented the patient (p <0.001); ethnicity was not a significant factor.

CONCLUSIONS: Rectal swabs are recommended for the detection of ESBL-E colonization. Staff and patient factors influence whether patients participate in prevalence studies, which may skew their findings.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app