Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-w5hgh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T21:05:12.023Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Introduction of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal polymerase chain reaction testing combined with pharmacist ordering and intervention reduces anti-MRSA antibiotic use in a multi-hospital system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 January 2026

Curtis D. CollinsOpen the ORCID record for Curtis D. Collins[Opens in a new window],
Chiraag Gupta,
Jennifer ChouOpen the ORCID record for Jennifer Chou[Opens in a new window],
James ShenOpen the ORCID record for James Shen[Opens in a new window] and
Holly Murphy
Curtis D. Collins*
Affiliation:
Trinity Health Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Chiraag Gupta
Affiliation:
Trinity Health Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Jennifer Chou
Affiliation:
Trinity Health Livonia, Livonia, MI, USA
James Shen
Affiliation:
Trinity Health Oakland, Pontiac, MI, USA
Holly Murphy
Affiliation:
Trinity Health Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
*
Corresponding author: Curtis D. Collins; Email: curtis.collins@trinity-health.org

Abstract

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal polymerase chain reaction implementation combined with pharmacist oversight across four hospitals resulted in a 20.2% reduction in anti-MRSA agent standardized antimicrobial administration ratios with significant reductions across 17 of 23 patient care units, further supporting this approach as an effective, multi-center, antimicrobial stewardship strategy.

Information

Type
Concise Communication
Information
Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology , Volume 6 , Issue 1 , 2026, e23
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America

Introduction

Inappropriate prescribing of vancomycin remains a significant challenge; over 27% of cases lack clear clinical justification.Reference Magill, OLeary and Ray1,Reference Pettit, Nguyen, Lew and Pisano2 Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing demonstrates a remarkably high negative predictive value in patients with pneumonia.Reference Parente, Cunha, Mylonakis and Timbrook3 Pharmacist-driven MRSA nasal PCR pneumonia protocols have proven effective, significantly reducing vancomycin use without compromising patient outcomes.Reference Pettit, Nguyen, Lew and Pisano2,Reference Pham, Sturm, Jacoby, Egwuatu and Dumkow4–Reference Azem, Saade and Veltri6 Despite these advances, opportunities remain for further optimization, particularly in large, multi-center health-systems.

In early 2023, four community teaching hospitals within a Michigan health-system implemented widespread MRSA nasal PCR testing. All pharmacists were authorized to order testing and monitor results for patients receiving antimicrobial therapy for pneumonia or sepsis of suspected respiratory origin.

Methods

This study evaluated the impact of MRSA nasal PCR initiation combined with active pharmacist ordering, monitoring, and intervention on the use of anti-MRSA agents. We used a multi-center, retrospective, pre-post cohort design across four community teaching hospitals (total 1,415 beds; facility range, 66–548 beds). All hospitals had established antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) prior to the intervention, each combining preauthorization with postprescriptive audit and feedback. ASPs operated independently but followed largely harmonized guidelines and protocols.

Clinical pharmacists at each facility are embedded in multidisciplinary care teams managing vancomycin and other targeted antimicrobials. Protocols enabled all pharmacists to order MRSA nasal PCR testing for patients receiving antibiotics in cases where pneumonia or sepsis with suspected respiratory origin was a concern. Test results informed recommendations relayed to primary care teams. Pharmacist ordering and monitoring occurred seven days a week on day shifts.

MRSA PCR testing was introduced at three hospitals in early 2023 and at the fourth hospital in September 2023. Cohorts were compared between preintervention (January 2021–December 2022) and postintervention (January 2023–December 2024) periods, excluding 2023 data for hospital 4 due to later implementation. Anti-MRSA standardized antimicrobial administration ratio (SAAR) trends were also compared within the preintervention cohort (2021 vs 2022) to investigate prePCR testing implementation trends. This study complied with Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines and was approved by the Trinity Health Ann Arbor Institutional Review Board.

Data was collected from National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) Antimicrobial Utilization and Resistance Module reporting and electronic medical record dashboards. Diagnoses were identified from International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) coding.

Outcomes included changes in SAAR data and days of therapy (DOTs) per 1,000 days present, analyzed at the facility and patient care unit levels.7 NHSN-defined anti-MRSA agents included formulary antibiotics: intravenous vancomycin, linezolid, daptomycin, and ceftaroline. SAAR changes were assessed using the mid-P exact test (Poisson distribution), and categorical variables with Pearson’s χ2 test. Analyses used the NHSN statistics calculator and IBM SPSS Statistics v. 26.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).7 Statistical significance was set at P ≤ .05.

Results

Following implementation, 7,923 MRSA PCR tests were ordered for 7,608 unique encounters. Of these, 2,291 (28.9%) were positive for any Staphylococcus species and 791 (10%) were positive for MRSA, with MRSA positivity rates varying by hospital (8.4%–13.3%, P < .001).

Most tests (5,979 [75.5%]) were ordered for patients with suspected or confirmed respiratory infections and pharmacists ordered 1,974 (24.9%) of all tests. Pharmacists appropriately ordered PCR testing in cases with confirmed respiratory infections more frequently than non-pharmacists (1,868 of 1,974 [94.6%] vs 4,111 of 5,949 [69.1%]; P < .001).

Prior to testing implementation, anti-MRSA SAAR increased overall within the preintervention cohort between 2021 and 2022 (0.846 vs 0.877; P < .001). Postintervention anti-MRSA agent utilization significantly decreased with a 20.2% overall decrease in SAAR (0.873 vs 0.697; P < .001) (Figure 1). This resulted in 8,124 fewer DOTs than predicted use. All hospitals recorded significant SAAR decreases, ranging from 9.8% (P = .012) to 23.9% (P < .001).

Figure 1.

Anti-MRSA agent standardized antimicrobial administration ratios. Graph compares SAARs for Anti-MRSA agents between preintervention and postintervention cohorts.

DOTs per 1,000 days present also decreased 21.3% (88 DOTs per 1,000 days present vs 69 DOTs per 1,000 days present; P < .001) (Figure 2). Actual decreases by hospitals ranged from 11 to 24 DOTs per 1,000 days present. Vancomycin accounted for 91% and 87.4% of anti-MRSA agent utilization in each respective cohort.

Figure 2.

Anti-MRSA agent days of therapy per 1,000 days present. Graph compares anti-MRSA agent days of therapy per 1,000 days present between preintervention and postintervention cohorts.

Of 23 patient care units, 21 (91.3%) showed decreased utilization, and 17 (73.9%) exhibited significant SAAR decreases. Intensive care units had a 31.2% SAAR decrease (0.988 vs 0.68; P < .001); overall mean unit SAAR declined 20.3% from baseline (0.865 vs 0.689; P < .001).

Discussion

Implementation of a MRSA nasal PCR testing with active pharmacist ordering, monitoring, and intervention significantly decreased the use of anti-MRSA antimicrobials across four community teaching hospitals. These results reinforce evidence that empowering pharmacists and incorporating MRSA nasal PCR screening into antimicrobial stewardship initiatives reduces unnecessary anti-MRSA therapy.Reference Pettit, Nguyen, Lew and Pisano2,Reference Pham, Sturm, Jacoby, Egwuatu and Dumkow4–Reference Azem, Saade and Veltri6

A notable strength of this study is the multi-center design, spanning four different community teaching hospitals. Whereas prior research is often limited to single-center academic settings, this study’s approach allowed us to evaluate the impact across varied institutional contexts. Despite baseline differences in prescribing cultures, stewardship processes, and patient populations, all institutions demonstrated substantial reductions in anti-MRSA agent use, enhancing external validity.

Few studies have analyzed SAAR changes to evaluate ASP interventions. Pettit et al. reported reduced anti-MRSA agent SAARs after pharmacy-driven MRSA PCR implementation.Reference Pettit, Nguyen, Lew and Pisano2 Our study provides further evidence for using SAAR as a valuable antimicrobial stewardship metric.

Pharmacist-driven MRSA PCR ordering and monitoring may be especially valuable in settings with limited resources. Pharmacists in our study consistently ordered PCR testing appropriately, enhancing diagnostic stewardship. Enabling pharmacists to autonomously order MRSA PCR testing, especially when overseeing vancomycin dosing and therapeutic drug monitoring, expands the reach and impact of stewardship initiatives, underscoring their essential role in optimizing care. Integrating ordering and analysis within daily pharmacy workflows facilitates real-time intervention and highlights the vital role of all pharmacists in antimicrobial stewardship.Reference Collins, Dumkow, Kufel, Nguyen and Wagner8

Limitations include a single health-system setting, which may not capture variations across geographic regions, healthcare systems, or ASP and pharmacy practice models. Anti-MRSA agent utilization reflected all conditions, and not solely pneumonias to which pharmacist ordering was limited. However, no other significant antimicrobial stewardship initiatives targeted anti-MRSA agents during this period. A substantial portion of tests (2,069 [34.8%]) were ordered by non-pharmacists for non-respiratory infections. Daily prospective audit and feedback are standard for anti-MRSA agent orders. It’s likely that PCR tests for non-respiratory infections were evaluated by pharmacists as part of daily surveillance; however, guidelines non-respiratory interpretation were not outlined, and pharmacist recommendations likely varied. The impact of testing for non-respiratory infections remains unclear. Additionally, we did not collect detailed clinical outcome data, adjudicate endpoints, or formally analyze costs.

In summary, MRSA nasal PCR testing introduction with pharmacist ordering, monitoring, and intervention significantly decreased anti-MRSA agent utilization in a multi-hospital health-system. Empowering pharmacists’ autonomy in this stewardship role represents an effective, scalable strategy to optimize antimicrobial use across diverse hospital settings.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the use of U-M GPT. GPT-4.1 [large language model]. University of Michigan; 2024 for condensing and improving readability of the manuscript. All content was reviewed and verified by the authors.

Financial support

None reported.

Competing interests

Dr. Collins has received payment for expert testimony related to antimicrobials described within this manuscript. All other authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

Footnotes

This work was presented in part at the 2025 IDWeek meeting in Atlanta, GA, USA.

References

Magill, SS, OLeary, E, Ray, SM, et al. Assessment of the appropriateness of antimicrobial use in US hospitals. JAMA Netw Open 2021;4:e212007.10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.2007CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pettit, NN, Nguyen, CT, Lew, AK, Pisano, J. Impact of the sequential implementation of a pharmacy-driven methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal-swab ordering policy and vancomycin 72-hour restriction protocol on standardized antibiotic administration ratio (SAAR) data for antibiotics used for resistant gram-positive infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2024;45:196–200.10.1017/ice.2023.190CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parente, DM, Cunha, CB, Mylonakis, E, Timbrook, TT. The clinical utility of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal screening to rule out MRSA pneumonia: a diagnostic meta-analysis with antimicrobial stewardship implications. Clin Infect Dis 2018;67:1–7.10.1093/cid/ciy024CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pham, SN, Sturm, AC, Jacoby, JS, Egwuatu, NE, Dumkow, LE. Impact of a pharmacist-driven MRSA nasal PCR protocol on pneumonia therapy. Hosp Pharm 2021;56:221–227.10.1177/0018578719888906CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diep, C, Meng, L, Pourali, S, et al. Effect of rapid methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nasal polymerase chain reaction screening on vancomycin use in the intensive care unit. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2021;78:2236–2244.10.1093/ajhp/zxab296CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Azem, R, Saade, EA, Veltri, C, et al. Implementation of an automated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus polymerase chain reaction screening intervention to guide discontinuation of vancomycin for pneumonia. Antimicrob Steward Healthc Epidemiol 2025;5:e325.10.1017/ash.2025.10234CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Antimicrobial use and resistance (AUR) options. National Healthcare Safety Network. https://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/psc/aur/index.html. Accessed September 23, 2025.Google Scholar
Collins, CD, Dumkow, LE, Kufel, WD, Nguyen, CT, Wagner, JL. ASHP/SIDP joint statement on the pharmacist’s role in antimicrobial stewardship. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2023;80:1577–1581.10.1093/ajhp/zxad164CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Figure 1.Anti-MRSA agent standardized antimicrobial administration ratios. Graph compares SAARs for Anti-MRSA agents between preintervention and postintervention cohorts.

Figure 1

Figure 2.Anti-MRSA agent days of therapy per 1,000 days present. Graph compares anti-MRSA agent days of therapy per 1,000 days present between preintervention and postintervention cohorts.