Comparison of nylon-flocked swab and cellulose sponge methods for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and gram-negative organism recovery from high-touch surfaces in patient rooms

Clare Rock; Michael Anderson; Shawna Lewis; Verna Scheeler; Elaine Nowakowski; Yea Jen Hsu; Aaron M. Milstone; Karen C. Carroll; Lisa L. Maragakis; Patricia J. Simner

doi:10.1017/ice.2018.182

Comparison of nylon-flocked swab and cellulose sponge methods for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and gram-negative organism recovery from high-touch surfaces in patient rooms

Clare Rock, Michael Anderson, Shawna Lewis, Verna Scheeler, Elaine Nowakowski, Yea Jen Hsu, Aaron M. Milstone, Karen C. Carroll, Lisa L. Maragakis, Patricia J. Simner

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

The ideal sampling method and benefit of qualitative versus quantitative culture for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) recovery in hospitalized patient rooms and bathrooms is unknown. Although the use of nylon-flocked swabs improved overall gram-negative organism recovery compared with cellulose sponges, they were similar for CRE recovery. Quantitative culture was inferior and unrevealing beyond the qualitative results.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	1257-1261
Number of pages	5
Journal	Infection control and hospital epidemiology
Volume	39
Issue number	10
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2018.182
State	Published - Oct 1 2018

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Epidemiology
Microbiology (medical)
Infectious Diseases

Access to Document

10.1017/ice.2018.182

Cite this

Rock, C., Anderson, M., Lewis, S., Scheeler, V., Nowakowski, E., Hsu, Y. J., Milstone, A. M., Carroll, K. C., Maragakis, L. L., & Simner, P. J. (2018). Comparison of nylon-flocked swab and cellulose sponge methods for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and gram-negative organism recovery from high-touch surfaces in patient rooms. Infection control and hospital epidemiology, 39(10), 1257-1261. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2018.182

Comparison of nylon-flocked swab and cellulose sponge methods for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and gram-negative organism recovery from high-touch surfaces in patient rooms. / Rock, Clare; Anderson, Michael; Lewis, Shawna et al.
In: Infection control and hospital epidemiology, Vol. 39, No. 10, 01.10.2018, p. 1257-1261.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Rock, C, Anderson, M, Lewis, S, Scheeler, V, Nowakowski, E, Hsu, YJ , Milstone, AM , Carroll, KC , Maragakis, LL & Simner, PJ 2018, 'Comparison of nylon-flocked swab and cellulose sponge methods for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and gram-negative organism recovery from high-touch surfaces in patient rooms', Infection control and hospital epidemiology, vol. 39, no. 10, pp. 1257-1261. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2018.182

@article{398236dd56e546228dc20c4abe939936,

title = "Comparison of nylon-flocked swab and cellulose sponge methods for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and gram-negative organism recovery from high-touch surfaces in patient rooms",

abstract = "The ideal sampling method and benefit of qualitative versus quantitative culture for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) recovery in hospitalized patient rooms and bathrooms is unknown. Although the use of nylon-flocked swabs improved overall gram-negative organism recovery compared with cellulose sponges, they were similar for CRE recovery. Quantitative culture was inferior and unrevealing beyond the qualitative results.",

author = "Clare Rock and Michael Anderson and Shawna Lewis and Verna Scheeler and Elaine Nowakowski and Hsu, {Yea Jen} and Milstone, {Aaron M.} and Carroll, {Karen C.} and Maragakis, {Lisa L.} and Simner, {Patricia J.}",

year = "2018",

month = oct,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1017/ice.2018.182",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "39",

pages = "1257--1261",

journal = "Infection control and hospital epidemiology",

issn = "0899-823X",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of nylon-flocked swab and cellulose sponge methods for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and gram-negative organism recovery from high-touch surfaces in patient rooms

AU - Rock, Clare

AU - Anderson, Michael

AU - Lewis, Shawna

AU - Scheeler, Verna

AU - Nowakowski, Elaine

AU - Hsu, Yea Jen

AU - Milstone, Aaron M.

AU - Carroll, Karen C.

AU - Maragakis, Lisa L.

AU - Simner, Patricia J.

PY - 2018/10/1

Y1 - 2018/10/1

N2 - The ideal sampling method and benefit of qualitative versus quantitative culture for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) recovery in hospitalized patient rooms and bathrooms is unknown. Although the use of nylon-flocked swabs improved overall gram-negative organism recovery compared with cellulose sponges, they were similar for CRE recovery. Quantitative culture was inferior and unrevealing beyond the qualitative results.

AB - The ideal sampling method and benefit of qualitative versus quantitative culture for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) recovery in hospitalized patient rooms and bathrooms is unknown. Although the use of nylon-flocked swabs improved overall gram-negative organism recovery compared with cellulose sponges, they were similar for CRE recovery. Quantitative culture was inferior and unrevealing beyond the qualitative results.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052941822&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85052941822&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/ice.2018.182

DO - 10.1017/ice.2018.182

M3 - Article

C2 - 30152307

AN - SCOPUS:85052941822

SN - 0899-823X

VL - 39

SP - 1257

EP - 1261

JO - Infection control and hospital epidemiology

JF - Infection control and hospital epidemiology

IS - 10

ER -

Comparison of nylon-flocked swab and cellulose sponge methods for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and gram-negative organism recovery from high-touch surfaces in patient rooms

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this