[Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus].

SIR,-During the past five years a particular strain of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus has been recognised as being epidemic in the Thames regions.' 2 This strain not only can cause serious disease in some groups of patients but has also spread within and between hospitals in spite of attempts to prevent this happening. ' 3 4 Over the past 12 months we have obtained evidence that this organism is spreading outside the Thames regions, and we know of 10 instances where transfer of a patient infected or colonised with epidemic methicillin resistant S aureus has resulted in the first introduction of this strain into a hospital. Transfer of the organism is often associated with patients who have undergone specialised surgical or medical procedures in the London area and may be returning to hospitals distant from the Thames regions. The introduction of epidemic methicillin resistant S aureus into a hospital is a serious event; its control may involve heavy expenditure and curtailment of clinical services, increased patient morbidity, and even mortality. Goodfield and Littlewood have -recordedsome of the consequences of a transfer with subsequent spread to dermatology patients.5 We strongly advise that thought should be given to the undesirability of transferring patients in this way. If such transfers are necessary patients returning from London should be isolated until they are shown to be free of the organism. Recipient hospitals should be warned by hospitals transferring patients if this methicillin resistant strain is circulating. E M CooKE R R MARPLES