Real-Time Genetic Sequencing Could Stop Superbug Outbreaks in Hospitals

Real-time genetic sequencing could keep hospital outbreaks in check

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Genetic sequences of drug-resistant bacteria have helped scientists better understand how these dastardly infections evolve and elude treatment. Preventive measures such as increasing health care worker hand washing and isolating infected patients have reduced the spread of many health care–acquired infections. Yet these preventable infections still kill some 100,000 patients in the U.S. every year.

Researchers might soon be able to track outbreaks in real time, thanks to advances in sequencing technology. Genomics has the capacity to “revolutionize current practice in clinical microbiology,” wrote Mark Walker and Scott Beatson of the School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences and the Australian Infectious Diseases Research Center at the University of Queensland in Australia, in an essay published online last November in Science. Until now clinical microbiology has relied primarily on culturing pathogens in the laboratory to study strain differences—a time-consuming process.

Some promising examples have already emerged. A 2011 outbreak of Klebsiella pneumoniae (KPC), which is resistant to most known antibiotics, at the National Institutes of Health's Clinical Center killed 11 patients and infected many others. Genetic sequencing of samples from patients and from health care workers allowed epidemiologists to track the outbreak to a single patient and to trace its spread. Moving closer to real-time tracking, researchers sequenced and analyzed strains from a 2011 outbreak of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in a hospital in Cambridge, England, while the outbreak was still occurring. The tests helped doctors and researchers identify a clear infection cluster in the neonatal intensive care unit, differentiating the bacteria from strains present in other clinics and hospital areas. Microbiologists were then able to trace potential means of spread and reduce the risk of further infections.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


These instances “point to a future in which direct sequencing of clinical samples allows same-day diagnosis, antibiotic-resistance gene profiling and virulence gene detection,” Walker and Beatson wrote. Such sequencing and analysis are still too expensive and labor-intensive for most health care institutions. Yet as technologies improve, putting the tools within reach, clinical microbiologists might be soon able to stop these superbug outbreaks before they start.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe