Partition locus-based classification of selected plasmids in Klebsiella pneumoniae, Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica spp.: an additional tool.

The dissemination of antimicrobial resistance genes in Enterobacteriaceae has been largely attributed to plasmids, circular DNA molecules capable of autonomous replication. Whereas high-copy-number plasmids primarily rely on passive diffusion for plasmid maintenance, low-copy-number plasmids utilize so-called partition (par) systems. Plasmid partition relies on three structures, i.e. a centromere like DNA site, a centromere-binding protein and an ATPase or a GTPase motor protein for plasmid positioning. Identification and classification of plasmids is essential for tracing plasmids conferring drug resistance. PCR-based replicon typing is currently the standard method for plasmid identification but there are new classification schemes, especially the relaxase gene typing (PRaseT). Here we developed a multiplex PCR set targeting par loci found on the plasmids most frequently encountered in Enterobacteriaceae. This method, called "plasmid partition gene typing" (PAR-T), was validated with 136 transconjugants or transformants harboring various replicon types. The method was tested with 30 multidrug-resistant clinical isolates including Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica carrying 1-4 replicons; all replicons were tested in parallel with PRaseT for comparison. Six multiplex PCRs and one simplex PCR including 18 pairs of primers recognized plasmids of groups IncA/C, FIA, FIB, FIC, FIIk, FII, HI1, HI2, I1, L/M, N, X. Our set of multiplex PCRs showed high specificity for the classification of resistance plasmids except for IncX replicons.

Health care in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE): the patient's perspective.

In order to provide more patient-centered care for patients suffering from systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), we studied their current satisfaction and preferences regarding future health care delivery. We sent questionnaires to all SLE patients visiting the rheumatology outpatient clinic in Leiden, the Netherlands. The questionnaire comprised three topics: (a) health care needs using a modified version of SLE Needs Questionnaire (range 0-38), (b) satisfaction with care per provider (visual analogue scale, range 0 (not at all)-100 (very satisfied)), and (c) preferences for future healthcare (four items). One hundred and two patients (63 % response) reported an average of 16 (±6) health care needs, with all patients reporting a need in the physical domain. More needs were significantly associated with worse physical functioning and a higher educational level. The average satisfaction score was 73 (±19) with a lower overall satisfaction score being associated with younger age and an educational level higher or lower than average. Regarding preferences for future health care delivery, 75 % of patients showed interest in a yearly standardized medical assessment, 57 % in regular, specialized nurse contacts using internet, 50 % in a yearly inventory on the need for self-management support, and 36 % in an education course. The association of age, education level and physical functioning with health care needs, and/or satisfaction suggest that the delivery of care should be better tailored to the needs of subgroups of patients.

Health care usage in Dutch systemic lupus erythematosus patients.

As a first step in the improvement of the organization of care for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) we studied their health care usage and its determinants. A questionnaire was sent to 161 outpatients of the rheumatology clinic of a Dutch university hospital. The questionnaire comprised questions on health care usage, quality of life and sociodemographic characteristics. Disease characteristics were extracted from the medical record. Among the 102 responders (63% response rate) the proportions of patients reporting contacts with a rheumatologist because of SLE since onset of the disease and over the past 12 months were 100% and 83%, respectively. These proportions were 93% and 68% for all other medical specialists, 88% and 44% for the general practitioner, 78% and 44% for any health professional, 29% and 9% for care at home, 48% and 17% for hospital admissions and 29% and 2% for day-patient care. Younger age, major organ involvement, the use of immunosuppressants and worse physical functioning were found to be significantly associated with greater health care use. This study demonstrated that health care usage by SLE patients is substantial and involves a variety of health care services. Further research should be directed at patients' satisfaction and patients' needs regarding the optimal organization of integrated, multidisciplinary services that are accessible for SLE patients of all ages.