Evidence Hub

Swab Testing to Optimize Pneumonia Treatment With Empiric Vancomycin: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Jeffrey A. Freiberg, E. Qian, Kylie G. Nairon, Benjamin J. Ereshefsky, Cassandra Hennessy, G. Van Winkle, Ariel A Lewis, Joy Justice et al.

Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2026

277 participants

Abstract

Abstract Background Fear of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) as a cause of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) frequently leads to empiric vancomycin coverage. Data evaluating the use of MRSA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) nasal swab testing to guide vancomycin de-escalation is limited for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods Swab Testing to Optimize Pneumonia Treatment With Empiric Vancomycin (STOP-Vanc) is a pragmatic, prospective, single-center, non-blinded randomized trial in which adult ICU patients with suspicion of CAP were randomized 1:1 to receive usual care either with (intervention) or without (control) the addition of MRSA nares PCR testing following ICU admission. The primary outcome was vancomycin-free hours alive, defined as the expected number of hours alive and free of vancomycin use within the first 7 days of trial enrollment as estimated using a longitudinal proportional odds state transition model adjusted for baseline covariates. Results A total of 277 adult ICU patients were randomized. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus PCR nasal swab testing had a negative predictive value (NPV) of 98.9% in the intervention arm. The primary endpoint, vancomycin-free hours alive, was 105.7 in the control arm and 109.7 in the intervention arm (adjusted difference, 4 hours; 95% CI, −9.5–18.2; P = .458). Conclusions Despite MRSA PCR nasal swab testing demonstrating a high NPV in this critically ill population, MRSA PCR nasal swab…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 277 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free