Here is a nice piece of info I found in the American Medical News by Kevin O'Reilly (the AMA are bunch of morons but the American Medical News and the writers there are very good):
In a recent The New England Journal of Medicine researchers screened more than 5,400 patients at 10 ICUs for MRSA and vancomycin-resistant enterococcus, asking health professionals to clean their hands, wear gloves and don gowns when entering the rooms of any colonized or infected patients. The control group was done by tracking 3,700 admissions to eight other ICUs that did not implement active surveillance. After six months, there was no difference in the MRSA or VRE colonization or infection rates between them.
All this is casting some doubt on universal MRSA screening. The cost of both screening and quarantining those patients is phenomenally high. I get that MRSA is terrible (I just incised and drained a massive MRSA abscess a few days ago). More studies will need to be done on how to fix this issue but it sure should put a hold on some idiotic agency making MRSA screening a "quality indicator" which can be use to hold back money from a hospital. But who cares about evidence when you have administrators and third parties to pay for?