PurposeWe conducted a cross-sectional study to measure the prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization, with a particular focus on livestock associated (LA)-MRSA in farmers working in contact with livestock (sheep) in one Italian region. Furthermore, we have assessed the antimicrobial resistance pattern of isolates and the association of carriage with specific characteristic of farms and working tasks.Patients and methodsDemographic data, occupational history, and contact with animals information was collected. Nasal and oropharyngeal swabs were collected and all samples were tested for the isolation and identification of S. aureus. Isolates were examined for antimicrobial susceptibility and all MRSA strains underwent molecular analyses through multiple-locus variable number of tandem repeat analysis (MLVA).ResultsA total of 115 sheep farms and 275 sheep farmers were enrolled. MRSA colonized workers were found in three farms; S. aureus was isolated in 97 workers (35.5%), whereas MRSA was isolated in 3 (1.1%) workers. All MRSA isolates were classified as multidrug resistant. Two of the MRSA isolates were resistant to quinupristin/dalfopristin (QDA), mupirocin, erythromycin, and tetracycline. Among methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA), 32 (34%) were resistant to tetracycline, 31 (33%) to erythromycin, 26 (27.6%) to QDA, and 22 (23.4%) to linezolid and clindamycin. One MRSA belonged to MLVA complex (MC) 001, found to colonize both humans and animals.ConclusionThe picture of MRSA transmission among sheep farmers does not seem to be critical, although there is the need to improve adequate control measures to prevent and minimize any biological risk in sheep farms for both animal and human health. Specific monitoring/surveillance programs would help in better understanding the epidemiology of resistant strains.

BackgroundHospital stay represents the opportunity for a change of therapy, about which patients may not know indications, contraindications, and mode of administration, which may lead to dosing errors, drug interactions, side effects, etc. It is therefore vital to communicate appropriate information to the discharged patient with a new prescription drug. The purpose of the study was to evaluate: 1) how communication about new chronic therapies is managed at hospital discharge and what kind of information is provided to patients; 2) to what extent patients are aware and confident in the management of these medications; 3) whether the way communication is provided affects patients’ awareness and self-confidence in the management of these therapies.MethodsParticipants were adult patients who were prescribed at least one new chronic medication at hospital discharge. A telephone interview after hospital discharge was performed to assess whether or not hospital healthcare personnel had given information about prescribed therapies and which aspects of therapies had been object of information.ResultsFive hundred thirty patients were interviewed. 67.7% reported having received counseling by the hospital physician, while 32.3% by discharge form. Basic information on treatment was provided to the great majority of patients, whereas only few patients reported to have been informed about eventual side effects and related behavior in case of side effects.ConclusionsSeveral aspects of patients’ knowledge and self-confidence on long term medications prescribed at hospital discharge need to be improved and the way communication is provided has a crucial role in the empowerment of patients in the management of these medications.

No abstract