Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
MRSA in pets from healthcare households - what to know
By Kottler, S et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary internal medicine·2010·Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Prevalence of Staphylococcus aureus and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus carriage in three populations.
Plain-English summary
In a study looking at the presence of a bacteria called Staphylococcus aureus, researchers found that both people and pets in households with healthcare workers had similar rates of this bacteria, including the drug-resistant type known as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). They tested samples from 586 households, which included both pets and their owners, and found that about 5.6% of people and 3.4% of pets carried MRSA. Interestingly, there was no significant difference in the rates of this bacteria between households with healthcare workers and those without. It was also rare for both a person and their pet to carry the same strain of MRSA. Overall, the study suggests that the presence of MRSA in pets and people is fairly common, but the risk of sharing the same strain is low.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A higher prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization is reported in healthcare workers compared with nonhealthcare workers. HYPOTHESIS: The prevalence of MRSA colonization differed in people and pets in households with healthcare workers as compared with households without healthcare workers. SUBJECTS: A person and 1 dog or cat from 586 households defined as either a nonhealthcare (n = 213), veterinary healthcare (n = 211), or human healthcare (n = 162) worker household. METHODS: Prospective cross-sectional study. Samples from humans and pets were cultured in vitro. Staphylococcus aureus was identified as methicillin sensitive (MSSA) or MRSA with mecA polymerase chain reaction. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis and spa-typing were used to characterize relatedness of S. aureus and MRSA and assign USA types. RESULTS: The prevalence of MSSA and MRSA in humans was 21.5% (126/586) and 5.63% (33/586), respectively, and 7.85% (46/586) and 3.41% (20/586), respectively, in pets. There were no differences in prevalences of either MSSA or MRSA between household types. The proportion of MRSA among all S. aureus isolates in humans and pets was 20.8% (33/159) and 30.3% (20/66), respectively. In < 1.0% (4/586) of households, the same strain of MRSA was found in both a person and a pet. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: There were no differences in the prevalences of MSSA or MRSA between healthcare worker and nonhealthcare worker households. Pets and people colonized with S. aureus were as likely to be colonized with MRSA. Colonization of a person and their pet with the same strain of MRSA was rare.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20002557/