耐甲氧西林葡萄球菌三种常规检测方法的比较评价  

Comparison Between 3 Normal Detections of Anti-methicillin Staphylocosis

作　　者：姚远[1] 张国富[1] 

机构地区：[1]山西省人民医院,山西太原030012

出　　处：《实用医技杂志》2004年第08B期1535-1536,共2页Journal of Practical Medical Techniques

摘　　要：目的 :比较分析耐甲氧西林葡萄球菌 (MRS) 3种临床常用检测方法对MRS检出率。方法 :同时采用普通M H平板、1μg/ml苯唑西林药敏纸片扩散法 ,含 4 %NaCl的M H平板、1μg/ml苯唑西林药敏纸片扩散法及含 4 %Na Cl、6 μg/ml苯唑西林琼脂筛选法对临床分离的 5 3株葡萄球菌进行检测 ,比较 3种方法对MRS的检出率。结果 :对 5 3株葡萄球菌 (凝固酶阳性 14株 ,凝固酶阴性 39株 ) ,3种方法对MRS的检出率分别为 72 .5 5 %、70 .5 9%和 5 0 .98%。普通M H平板药敏纸片扩散法和含 4 %NaCl的M H平板药敏纸片扩散法MRS检出率差异无显著性 (P >0 .0 5 ) ,两种纸片扩散法与琼脂筛选法在MRS检出率差异均有显著性 (P <0 .0 5 )。结论 :纸片扩散法对MRS的检出率明显高于作为MRS检测推荐方法的含盐琼脂平板筛选法。Purpose To compare the detective rate of 3 normal methods of anti-methicillin staphylocosis ( MRS) detection. Methods 53 strains MRS were detected with 3 normal methods such as 2 paper diffusion methods and a agar diffusion method at the same time, and their detective rate were compared. Results The detective rate of the 3 methods were 72.55 %, 70.59 %, 50.98 % respectively. There were a significance difference between paper diffusion and agar diffusion methods (P<0.05). Conclusion The detective rate to MRS of paper diffusion method is higher than agar diffusion method.

关 键 词：耐甲氧西林葡萄球菌 检测 比较评价 纸片扩散法 琼脂筛选法 

分 类 号：R446.5[医药卫生—诊断学]