This is good review of typing methods and their use for MRSA and S. aureus: Stefani S, Chung DR, Lindsay J a, Friedrich AW, Kearns AM, Westh H, et al. Meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): global epidemiology and harmonisation of typing methods. International journal of antimicrobial agents [Internet]. Elsevier B.V.; 2012 Apr [cited 2013 Mar 24];39(4):273–82. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22230333

Dear Jan,

Thank you for your response. We previously wrote a letter to editor about this article (You can see the title of our letter in PubMed page you mentioned). Personally, I believe that such typing methods are "only" useful for epidemiological purposes.

Sorry, obviously it wasn´t necessary send you link to this article. I haven't previously noticed your comment to this article. Can I have a question? I´m interested in S. aureus from Cystic fibrosis patients and also in typing methods and I´m not sure what you mean by clinical use of typing method? Thanks

Jan

Imagine you find three S aureus infections with ST5-MRSA-I spa type 447 (t447) in a single ward in your hospital. The ward will be closed due to an outbreak of MRSA. You may also track these strains and find their origin in the Netherlands. However, in developing countries there is no reason to type the isolates. Overcrowding and lack of hospital beds does not let you to isolate the patient or close the ward.

Here, physicians treat S aureus infections empirically and "sometimes" based on antimicrobial susceptibility patterns.

Now, ask yourself: How can I help cystic fibrosis patients when I'm trying to type these isolates?

Thank you for your explanation, now I understand.

Jan