If one is treated for MRSA, are they still contagious?

[beachmom]

If someone has a MRSA infection and is treated with IV Vanco, when he gets out of the hospital, is he still able to spread MRSA to others?

If a person has strep, after 24 hours of antibiotics they are considered not contagious anymore. But with MRSA, I have heard it said people may be carriers forever.

I had a relative treated for MRSA, and the doctors just told us to "wash our hands a lot and we will be fine." I thought, no way. If he still has MRSA on him, if he touches ANYTHING in my house, and then I touch the same thing, I can now become colonized with MRSA. But if he is treated with Vanco, and the wound heals completely, is he still colonized? Can he still spread it to everyone he touches?

So what's your opinion? If you invite someone in your home who was treated for MRSA, would you disinfect everything he touches?

[VANurse2010]

There's more than likely MRSA already all over your house. That's why you have an immune system.

[anon456, BSN, RN]

It's not that uncommon anymore and chances are you are exposed at the grocery store or library on a regular basis. Once in awhile it takes hold. Yes some people are colonized with it and live with it just fine. Others get an acute infection and are treated for it.

[beachmom]

If someone has a MRSA infection and is on Vanco and Zosyn, and the wound heals, do they still have MRSA?

If someone has strep, and they are treated with antibiotics, after 24 hours, they are not infectious anymore. Is MRSA different?

[righteousjenn]

If someone has a MRSA infection and is on Vanco and Zosyn, and the wound heals, do they still have MRSA?

If someone has strep, and they are treated with antibiotics, after 24 hours, they are not infectious anymore. Is MRSA different?

MRSA and strep are two completely different bacteria. I don't think you can even compare the two.

[beachmom]

I know they are different. I'm just saying you can cure strep. Why can't you cure MRSA? If the antibiotics kill the MRSA enough for the wound to heal, why is the person still colonized and infectious?

[SoldierNurse22, BSN, RN]

MRSA is resistant to methicillin, a very high-powered antibiotic. It's difficult to cure MRSA because of this drug resistance.

Per the Mayo clinic:

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection is caused by a strain of staph bacteria that's become resistant to the antibiotics commonly used to treat ordinary staph infections.

http://www.cdc.gov/mrsa/healthcare/index.html

Please review this info on nosocomial MRSA from the CDC. It's a matter of an infection that is community-acquired and typically superficial (skin deep) versus nosocomial and frequently found in the blood, in surgical wounds, and pneumonia cases.

[roser13, ASN, RN]

My facility requires a negative MRSA swab before removing precautions. Unfortunately, very few providers do their due diligence and follow up with the test after treatment.

[~PedsRN~, BSN, RN]

My facility requires a negative MRSA swab before removing precautions. Unfortunately, very few providers do their due diligence and follow up with the test after treatment.

In our facility, if you are ever diagnosed with active MRSA, you are considered to have it unless you get THREE negative swabs. :) A lot of times people are discharged before they get that third swab!

[ToyaB]

That's actually a good question. From what I understand (or at least what I see in the system I work in) a patient goes on contact precautions if they have EVER tested positive for MRSA wether or not they have an "active" infection.

Seems to me the MRSA is something that you always have once you get it. Sounds more like a virus than a bacteria... You'd think that after you were treated- that would be that, but it doesn't seem to be the case, does it? Hmmmmmm....

[roser13, ASN, RN]

We used to require 2 swabs, but recent research has indicated only one is necessary.

I always heard the "once a MRSA patient, always a MRSA patient" also. But I've seen folks who battled it for quite some time eventually test negative. So, I guess it can happen.

I also always figured that I was MRSA positive, given my healthcare history. But my pre-op swab for TKA was negative.

[nurseprnRN, BSN, RN]

If only one is treated, whoever they are have presumably not been, so they may still be carriers. The one may not be anymore (the three swabs rule). Please try to keep your pronouns and verbs parallel, because I am easily confused about this. One is singular, they is plural. One has, they have.

As to MRSA, it's ubiquitous in the community and in institutions now. They used to differentiate between strains, one being called HA (hospital-acquired) and the other CA (community-acquired), but this is no longer true as the two strains have swapped back and forth so often.

Don't get all fluffed up about this. If someone who is colonized with MRSA touched something you touch later, that doesn't necessarily infect you or colonize you (you should make yourself familiar with the very real differences in these two states, and not just for purposes of this discussion, either) and you probably could find it in your house anyway. Go to the CDC site cited earlier and read up.