In the Journal of Clinical Microbiology, researchers at University Hospital Heidelberg in Germany evaluate how well the new BD Max MRSA assay can detect low-prevalence methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus as compared to BD's GeneOhm MRSA achromopeptidase assay. The Max MRSA assay had a 93.9 percent sensitivity and a 99.2 percent specificity while the GeneOhm MRSA ACP assay 93.8 percent sensitivity and 98.3 specificity, though the researchers note that the differences were not statistically significant. Upon retesting, the Max MRSA test could resolve all samples while the GeneOhm MRSA ACP tests could not. In addition, the researchers point out that GeneOhm MRSA ACP assay took less time to deliver results, though it needed more hands-on time than the Max MRSA test did. <\/p>\n
\"This study shows that within a routine clinical setting in a population with low MRSA prevalence the fully automated BD Max MRSA assay and the established BD GeneOhm MRSA ACP assay have similar sensitivity and specificity characteristics,\" the researchers conclude. \"The BD Max MRSA assay produced less unresolved results, had fewer false positive results and showed reduced handling requirements thereby facilitating use of this molecular assay.\" <\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Link: In the Journal of Clinical Microbiology, researchers at University Hospital Heidelberg in Germany evaluate how well the new BD Max MRSA assay can detect low-prevalence methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus as compared to BD's GeneOhm MRSA achromopeptidase assay. The Max MRSA assay had a 93.9 percent sensitivity and a 99.2 percent specificity while the GeneOhm MRSA ACP assay 93.8 percent sensitivity and 98.3 specificity, though the researchers note that the differences were not statistically significant. Upon retesting, the Max MRSA test could resolve all samples while the GeneOhm MRSA ACP tests could not Continue reading
\nFinding MRSA<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"