Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T20:43:14.691Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Use of a Selective Staphylococcal Broth v Direct Plating for the Recovery of Staphylococcus aureus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2016

R.L. Sautter ,
W.J. Brown  and
L.H. Mattman
R.L. Sautter*
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Wayne State University, and the Department of Immunology/Microbiology and Pathology, Hutzel Hospital, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan
W.J. Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Wayne State University, and the Department of Immunology/Microbiology and Pathology, Hutzel Hospital, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan
L.H. Mattman
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Wayne State University, and the Department of Immunology/Microbiology and Pathology, Hutzel Hospital, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan
*
Harrisburg Hospital, South Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17101-2099
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Nine hundred seventy-two cultures taken from the external nares and the vaginal vestibules of 54 women for the isolation of Staphylococcus aureus were studied. The swabs were plated directly to a trypticase soy agar plate containing 5% sheep blood and were then placed into a selective staphylococcal broth. Both culture methods were compared for the ability to recover S aureus.

Twenty percent (26/131) and 66% (38/58) of the S aureus-positive cultures taken from the nares and vagina respectively were cultured from the selective broth only. We believe that a selective staphylococcal broth should be used in addition to routine culture techniques to isolate S aureus from infection control surveillance cultures.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 9 , Issue 5 , May 1988 , pp. 204 - 205
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Nakashima, AK, Allen, JA, Martone, WJ, et al: Epidemic bullous impetigo in a nursery due to a nasal carrier of Staphylococcus aureus: Role of epidemiology and control measures. Infect Control 1984; 5:326–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Yu, VL, Goetz, A, Wagener, M, et al: Staphylococcus aureus nasal carriage and infection in patients on hemodialysis: Efficacy oi antibiotic prophylaxis. N Engl J Med 1986; 315:91–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Sewell, CM, Claridge, J. Lackn, C, et al: Staphylococcal nasal carriage and subsequent infection in peritoneal dialysis patients. JAMA 1982: 248: 1493–1495.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Alexander, J, Maples, G, Wilson, J, et al: Evaluation of new medium tor staphylococcus isolation. Am J Med Tech 1973; 39:37–39.Google Scholar
5. Howden, R: A new medium for the isolation of Staphylococcus aureus including thymine requiring strain from sputum. Med Lab Sci 1981; 38:29–33.Google Scholar
6. Walsh, TJ. Vlahov, D, Hansen, SL, et al: Prospective microbiologic surveillance in control of nosocomial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus . Infect Control 1987; 8:7–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Tofte, RW, Williams, DN: Toxic shock syndrome: Clinical and laboratory features in 15 patients. Ann Intern Med 1981; 94:149–156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Sarovolatz, LD, Markowitz, N, Arking, L, et al: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: Epidemiologic observations during a community-acquired outbreak. Ann Intern Med 1982; 96:11–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Buer, EF, Gilden, MM, Wienke, CL, et al: Comparative efficiency of two enrichment and four plating media for isolation of Staphylococcus aureus . J Assoc Off Anal Chem 1971; 54:736–738.Google Scholar
10. Aly, RA, Britz, MB, Maibach, HI: Quantitative microbiology of human vulva. Brit J Dermatol 1979; 101:445–448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed