MRSA infections are a current concern in the elderly orthopaedic patient, with colonisation rates of between 417% reported in these patient groups. In our institution there has been concern regarding MRSA surgical site infection and cross contamination of elective and emergency patients. This prompted the unit to consider a screening programme to identify MRSA carriers. We undertook the following project to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of implementing such a screening programme.

The aim was to to ascertain the incidence of colonisation with MRSA, rate of wound infection and associated risk factors in patients admitted with a fractured proximal femur.

This was a prospective, blinded case series of 100 consecutive patients admitted to the trauma ward with a fractured proximal femur. Three swabs (axilla, nasal and perineum) were taken within 24 hours of admission. Data from each patient was collated and each patient was followed until discharge to assess for surgical site infection.

The age range was 60–97 years. 26% were admitted from institutional care. Four patients were colonised with MRSA on admission. An association was seen between patients colonised on admission and long term or recent residence in institutional care. One of these patients went on to develop colonisation of the surgical wound however this did not lead to surgical site infection and the patient was successfully treated with MRSA eradication therapy only. In these 4 patients all wounds healed satisfactorily with no evidence of infection.

While MRSA continues to be a growing concern in the press we found that rates of colonisation and subsequent infection were not high. There were no documented cases of MRSA wound infection in colonised individuals. Given the cost to detect these low levels of colonisation we do not feel that a screening regime would be cost effective or justified.

Correspondence should be addressed to Major M Butler RAMC, Princess Elizabeth Orthopaedic Centre, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, Devon.

Background: In recent years an increased trend in MRSA infection has been seen in hospitals and the community, with colonisation rates of between 4 – 17% reported in these patient groups. There is also an association between carriage of Staph. Aureus and staphylococcal surgical wound infection.

In our institution there has been concern regarding MRSA surgical site infection and possible cross contamination of elective and emergency patients. There would be implications for implant related infections if this were to occur. This had prompted the unit to consider adopting a screening programme to identify and treat MRSA carriers. This would aim to minimise risk of post operative infection and cross infection. As little was actually known about the MRSA colonisation rates of admissions to our hospital we undertook the following project to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of implementing such a screening programme.

Aim: To ascertain the incidence of colonisation with MRSA, rate of wound infection and the associated risk factors in patients admitted to the trauma ward with a fractured neck of femur.

Method: A prospective, blinded case series of 100 consecutive patients admitted to the trauma ward with a fractured neck of femur. Three swabs (axilla, nasal and perineum) were taken within 24 hours of admission. Data from each patient was collected to ascertain the presence of risk factors linked to MRSA colonisation and each patient was followed until discharged to assess for surgical site infection.

Results: 304 swabs were taken from 100 patients. Age range 60–97. 26% admitted from institutionalised care and 74% admitted from their own home. Four patients were colonised with MRSA on admission (2 nasal, 2 perineal). An association was seen between patients colonised on admission and long term or recent residence in institutionalised care. One of these patients went on to develop colonisation of the surgical wound however this did not lead to surgical site infection and the patient was successfully treated with MRSA eradication therapy only. In these 4 patients all wounds healed satisfactorily with no evidence of infection.

There were three superficial surgical site infections postoperatively, all in individuals who were clear on their admission screening. Of these two were due to MRSA and one was due to MSSA. There were no cases of deep infection requiring further surgery.

Conclusion:While MRSA continues to be a growing concern we found that, in our hospital, rates of MRSA colonisation and subsequent infection were not high. There were no documented cases of MRSA wound infection in colonised individuals. Given the cost involved in swabbing all patients to detect these low levels of colonisation we do not feel that an expensive screening regimen would be cost effective or justified in our institution.

We set out to ascertain if there is a consensus in elective orthopaedic practice for the screening and management of MRSA. A questionnaire was distributed to all British Orthopaedic Association Linkmen, with prepaid return envelopes.

A response rate of 60% (159 of 250) was recorded. 62% do have a screening policy in practice: all admissions (44%), high risk patients only (22%), only patients for joint replacement (12%), both patients for joint replacement and patients at high risk of carriage (21%). Eradication therapy is used in a MRSA - positive patient prior to joint replacement surgery by 91%, following which the MRSA status would be checked by 88%. The efficacy of eradication would be confirmed by obtaining: one set (29%), two sets (13%), and three sets (49%) of negative swabs, prior to proceeding with surgery. A 2nd generation Cephalosporin (77%), followed by Teicoplanin/Vancomycin (16%) are in routine use for antibiotic prophylaxis.

The majority of responders have adopted a practice of screening patients; however, significant differences exist in the population that is selected for screening. Eradication in MRSA positive patients is a common practice, but there is variation in the number of subsequent screens performed. Cephalosporins remain the antibiotic of choice for prophylaxis but first line therapeutic agents are also being used which may have implications for resistance. These variations can be partly attributed to the lack of evidence from which practical guidelines can be drafted, as highlighted by national guidelines published in 1998. Until further research is done into the cost effectiveness of screening and the further management of MRSa we have to rely on strict adherence to infection control practices, and appropriate use of antibiotics.