Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sources of systematic errors in the epidemiology of vancomycin-resistant enterococci

  • Clinical and Epidemiological Study
  • Published:
Infection Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The rates of vancomycin resistance among enterococci (VRE) have been increasing worldwide. However, reports on vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) are easily biased and meta-data reporting is insufficient. Additionally, no standardised protocol for VRE testing currently exists. The aim of our study was to investigate, for the first time, the impact of introduced bias in VRE reports. We also analysed the sensitivity of our in-house screening test for VRE, namely, a broth-enriched PCR assay.

Methods

Retrospective review of microbial and clinical data on all patients tested for VRE who had been admitted to a large university hospital over a 5-year period and an analysis of the possible impact of introduced bias. Our screening test was also evaluated using clinical isolates.

Results

A total of 27,636 screening tests were carried out over the 5-year study period, of which 2,459 were VRE-positive. The number of screening tests increased dramatically over the study period, with 1,053 tests carried out on 435 patients in 2006 and 9,444 tests carried out on 5,104 patients in 2010. VRE prevalence was 8.1 % over the 5-year period. The introduction of measurement bias caused a clear overestimation of absolute VRE numbers. The sensitivity of our screening test was 95.5 % with a positive predictive value of 39 %.

Conclusion

Biased reports lead to the implementation of high-cost containment measures that may be both unnecessary and detrimental to the patient. Our data show that systematic errors in VRE reports caused a clear overestimation of absolute VRE numbers, thereby indicating an outbreak situation even though the actual prevalence of VRE was decreasing. We suggest that reports of VRE must take measurement and analysis biases into account, otherwise any conclusion drawn is unreliable and inconclusive.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Werner G, Coque TM, Hammerum AM, Hope R, Hryniewicz W, Johnson A et al. Emergence and spread of vancomycin resistance among enterococci in Europe. Euro Surveill. 2008;13(47):1–11. pii: 19046.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Murray BE. Diversity among multidrug-resistant enterococci. Emerg Infect Dis. 1998;4(1):37–47.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Biedenbach DJ, Moet GJ, Jones RN. Occurrence and antimicrobial resistance pattern comparisons among bloodstream infection isolates from the SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program (1997–2002). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2004;50(1):59–69. doi:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2004.05.003.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Haas EJ, Zaoutis TE, Prasad P, Li M, Coffin SE. Risk factors and outcomes for vancomycin-resistant enterococcus bloodstream infection in children. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;. doi:10.1086/655464.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Song JY, Cheong HJ, Jo YM, Choi WS, Noh JY, Heo JY, et al. Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus colonization before admission to the intensive care unit: a clinico-epidemiologic analysis. Am J Infect Control. 2009;37(9):734–40. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2008.09.025.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Theilacker C, Jonas D, Huebner J, Bertz H, Kern WV. Outcomes of invasive infection due to vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium during a recent outbreak. Infection. 2009;37(6):540–3. doi:10.1007/s15010-009-9023-5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Blot S, Depuydt P, Vandewoude K, De Bacquer D. Measuring the impact of multidrug resistance in nosocomial infection. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2007;20(4):391–6. doi:10.1097/QCO.0b013e32818be6f7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Weinstein JW, Tallapragada S, Farrel P, Dembry LM. Comparison of rectal and perirectal swabs for detection of colonization with vancomycin-resistant enterococci. J Clin Microbiol. 1996;34(1):210–2.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Milstone AM, Maragakis LL, Carroll KC, Perl TM. Targeted surveillance to identify children colonized with vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus in the pediatric intensive care unit. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;31(1):95–8. doi:10.1086/649221.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yoonchang SW, Peck KR, Kim OS, Lee JH, Lee NY, Oh WS, et al. Efficacy of infection control strategies to reduce transmission of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in a tertiary care hospital in Korea: a 4-year follow-up study. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2007;28(4):493–5. doi:10.1086/513024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dutka-Malen S, Evers S, Courvalin P. Detection of glycopeptide resistance genotypes and identification to the species level of clinically relevant enterococci by PCR. J Clin Microbiol. 1995;33(5):1434.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Eigner U, Holfelder M, Oberdorfer K, Betz-Wild U, Bertsch D, Fahr AM. Performance of a matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time-of-flight mass spectrometry system for the identification of bacterial isolates in the clinical routine laboratory. Clin Lab. 2009;55(7–8):289–96.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kobayashi I, Muraoka H, Iyoda T, Nishida M, Hasegawa M, Yamaguchi K. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus by the VITEK 2 system, and comparison with two NCCLS reference methods. J Med Microbiol. 2004;53(Pt 12):1229–32. doi:10.1099/jmm.0.45765-0.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Dombradi Z, Bihari Z, Horvath KI, Szabo J. Comparison of the VITEK 2 system with the E-test for the determination of glycopeptide susceptibility of vanA and vanC positive enterococci. Acta Microbiol Immunol Hung. 2010;57(3):157–63. doi:10.1556/AMicr.57.2010.3.1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. van Den Braak N, Goessens W, van Belkum A, Verbrugh HA, Endtz HP. Accuracy of the VITEK 2 system to detect glycopeptide resistance in enterococci. J Clin Microbiol. 2001;39(1):351–3. doi:10.1128/JCM.39.1.351-353.2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Schouten MA, Hoogkamp-Korstanje JA, Meis JF, Voss A. Prevalence of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in Europe. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2000;19(11):816–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Goossens H, Jabes D, Rossi R, Lammens C, Privitera G, Courvalin P. European survey of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in at-risk hospital wards and in vitro susceptibility testing of ramoplanin against these isolates. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2003;51[Suppl 3]:iii5–12. doi:10.1093/jac/dkg271.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Sagel U, Schulte B, Heeg P, Borgmann S. Vancomycin-resistant enterococci outbreak, Germany, and calculation of outbreak start. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008;14(2):317–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hartman JM, Forsen JW Jr, Wallace MS, Neely JG. Tutorials in clinical research: part IV: recognizing and controlling bias. Laryngoscope. 2002;112(1):23–31. doi:10.1097/00005537-200201000-00005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sackett DL. Bias in analytic research. J Chronic Dis. 1979;32(1–2):51–63.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Ibrahim EH, Sherman G, Ward S, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH. The influence of inadequate antimicrobial treatment of bloodstream infections on patient outcomes in the ICU setting. Chest. 2000;118(1):146–55.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Vergis EN, Hayden MK, Chow JW, Snydman DR, Zervos MJ, Linden PK, et al. Determinants of vancomycin resistance and mortality rates in enterococcal bacteremia. a prospective multicenter study. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135(7):484–92.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

All authors report no conflict of interest relevant to this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, Department of Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany

    N. T. Mutters

  2. Division of Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, Department of Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 324, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    U. Frank

Authors
  1. N. T. Mutters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. U. Frank
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to U. Frank.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mutters, N.T., Frank, U. Sources of systematic errors in the epidemiology of vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Infection 41, 305–310 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-013-0410-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-013-0410-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation