title: A perspective on the evidence regarding methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus surveillance.
abstract: Two prominent studies have been used by policy makers to prevent the enactment of standards of care regarding active surveillance of patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in hospital settings. In this brief review and perspective of those studies, we contend that both studies have serious limitations (i.e., the intervention group was not given optimal intervention) that may not have been scrutinized by many policy makers, health officials, and other researchers. These studies seem to have had a disproportionate impact on health-care policy despite their limitations. Furthermore, health-care policy and treatment standards need to reflect the preponderance of evidence with appropriate weight given to research studies based on their strengths and limitations. Only then can treatment standards that are effective against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus be adopted or refuted.
authors.affiliation: Health Watch USA, Somerset, KY, USA. healthwatchusa@gmail.com
authors.forename: Kevin
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Kavanagh
authors.forename: Said
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Abusalem
authors.forename: Daniel M
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: Saman
mesh_terms: D003428:Cross Infection / Q000517:prevention & control*; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine / Q000592:standards*; D006302:Health Services Research / Q000592:standards; D006801:Humans; D017053:Infection Control / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D055624:Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus / Q000187:drug effects*; D017594:Publication Bias; D059039:Standard of Care; D013203:Staphylococcal Infections / Q000382:microbiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D020713:Vancomycin Resistance / Q000187:drug effects*