Long-Term Care Facilities Are Reservoirs for Antimicrobial-Resistant Sequence Type 131 Escherichia coli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Emerging data implicate long-term care facilities (LTCFs) as reservoirs of fluoroquinolone-resistant (FQ-R) Escherichia coli of sequence type 131 (ST131). We screened for ST131 among LTCF residents, characterized isolates molecularly, and identified risk factors for colonization. Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional study using a single perianal swab or stool sample per resident in 2 LTCFs in Olmsted County, Minnesota, from April to July 2013. Confirmed FQ-R E. coli isolates underwent polymerase chain reaction-based phylotyping, detection of ST131 and its H30 and H30-Rx subclones, extended virulence genotyping, and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) analysis. Epidemiological data were collected from medical records. Results. Of 133 fecal samples, 33 (25%) yielded FQ-R E. coli, 32 (97%) of which were ST131. The overall proportion with ST131 intestinal colonization was 32 of 133 (24%), which differed by facility: 17 of 41 (42%) in facility 1 vs 15 of 92 (16%) in facility 2 (P = .002). All ST131 isolates represented the H30 subclone, with virulence gene and PFGE profiles resembling those of previously described ST131 clinical isolates. By PFGE, certain isolates clustered both within and across LTCFs. Multivariable predictors of ST131 colonization included inability to sign consent (odds ratio [OR], 4.16 [P = .005]), decubitus ulcer (OR, 4.87 [ P = .04]), and fecal incontinence (OR, 2.59 [P = .06]). Conclusions. Approximately one fourth of LTCF residents carried FQ-R ST131 E. coli resembling ST131 clinical isolates. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis suggested intra- and interfacility transmission. The identified risk factors suggest that LTCF residents who require increased nursing care are at greatest risk for ST131 colonization, possibly due to healthcare-associated transmission.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".