Utilizing moist or dry swabs for the sampling of nasal MRSA carriers? An in vivo and in vitro study

14Citations
Citations of this article
35Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This study investigates the quantitative bacterial recovery of Methicillin-resistantStaphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in nasal screenings by utilizing dry or moistened swabs within an in vivo and an in vitro experimental setting. 135 nasal MRSA carrierswere each swabbed in one nostril with a dry and in the other one with a moistened rayon swab. Quantitative bacterial recovery was measured by standard viable count techniques. Furthermore,an anatomically correct artificial nose model was inoculated with a numerically defined suspension of MRSA and swabbed with dry and moistened rayon, polyurethane-foam and nylon-flocked swabs to test these different settings and swab-materials under identical laboratory conditions. In vivo, quantities of MRSA per nostril in carriers varied between <101 and >107 colony forming units, with a median of 2.15x104 CFU. However, no statistically significant differences could be detected for the recovery of MRSA quantities when swabbing nasal carriers with moist or dry rayon swabs. In vitro testing confirmedthe in vivo data for swabs with rayon, polyurethane and nylon-flocked tips, since pre-moistening of swabs did not significantly affect the quantities of retrieved bacteria. Therefore, pre-moistening of swabs prior to nasal MRSA sampling provides no advantage in termsof recovering greater bacterial quantities and therefore can be omitted. In addition, this situation can be mimicked in an in vitro model, thereby providing a useful basis for future in vitro testings of new swab types or target organisms for screening approaches.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Warnke, P., Devide, A., Weise, M., Frickmann, H., Schwarz, N. G., Schäffler, H., … Podbielski, A. (2016). Utilizing moist or dry swabs for the sampling of nasal MRSA carriers? An in vivo and in vitro study. PLoS ONE, 11(9). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163073

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free