ObjectivesTo systematically review the prevalence of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in healthy Chinese population.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, WanFang Data and CNKI databases were electronically searched to collect cross-sectional studies of the prevalence of MRSA in China from inception to December 16th, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, and then, meta-analysis was performed by using Stata 12.0 software.ResultsA total of 25 cross-sectional studies were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: the pooled prevalence of MRSA in healthy population was 13.9% (95%CI 9.6% to 18.2%). The results of subgroup analysis showed that: the prevalence of MRSA in children was 16% (95%CI 8% to 24%), and that in adults (non-children) was 13% (95%CI 9% to 16%). The prevalence of MRSA in individuals with occupational livestock exposure was 28% (95%CI 5% to 51%), in medical staff it was 16% (95%CI 8% to 25%), in medical students it was 12% (95%CI 3% to 20%) and in community residents it was 5% (95%CI 2% to 8%).ConclusionsThe overall prevalence of MRSA in healthy Chinese population is approximately 13.9%. Effective prevention and control measures are required to reduce the spread of MRSA.
Objective To systematically review the effectiveness and safety of linezolid versus teicoplanin in patients with MRSA pneumonia. Methods Such databases as CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, Science Direct, PubMed, Ovid, SciFinder, The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2013) and EMbase were electronically searched for published articles (randomized controlled trials or non-randomized prospective trials with comparable baseline between groups) at home and abroad on the clinical effectiveness and safety of linezolid versus teicoplanin in patients with MRSA pneumonia from January 2003 to March 2013. Using the Cochrane methods, two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software in clinical cure rates, clinical effective rates, microbiologic eradication rates, and adverse reaction incidences. Results Finally, 7 studies were included involving 637 patients. The results of meta-analysis were clinical effective rates (RR=1.17, 95%CI 1.04 to 1.32, P=0.009), clinical cure rates (RR=1.06, 95%CI 0.94 to 1.19, P=0.37), bacterial clearance rates (RR=1.32, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.68, P=0.03), and adverse events rates (RR=1.24, 95%CI 0.78 to 1.97, P=0.37). The results of Begg test and Egger test were not significant (Pgt;0.05). Conclusion Current evidence shows that, in treating MRSA pneumonia, linezolid is better than teicoplanin in clinical effective rates and bacterial clearance rates. However, they are alike in clinical cure rates and bacterial clearance rates.