scholarly journals Differences in Hypotensive vs. Non-Hypotensive Sepsis Management in the Emergency Department: Door-to-Antibiotic Time Impact on Sepsis Survival

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 91
Author(s):  
Leonor Ballester ◽  
Rafael Martínez ◽  
Juan Méndez ◽  
Gloria Miró ◽  
Manel Solsona ◽  
...  

Background: Sepsis diagnosis can be incorrectly associated with the presence of hypotension during an infection, so the detection and management of non-hypotensive sepsis can be delayed. We aimed to evaluate how the presence or absence of hypotension, on admission at the emergency department, affects the initial management and outcomes of patients with community-onset severe sepsis. Methods: Demographic, clinical, laboratory, process of care, and outcome variables were recorded for all patients, at the emergency department of our university hospital, who presented with community-onset severe sepsis, between 1 March and 31 August in three consecutive years. Patient management consisted of standardized bundled care with five measures: Detection, blood cultures and empirical antibiotics, oxygen supplementation and fluid resuscitation (if needed), clinical monitoring, and noradrenalin administration (if needed). We compared all variables between patients who had hypotension (mean arterial pressure <65 mmHg), on admission to the emergency department, and those who did not. Results: We identified 153 episodes (84 (54.5%) men; mean age 73.6 ± 1.2; mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score 4.9 ± 2.7, and 41.2% hospital mortality). Hypotension was present on admission to the emergency department in 57 patients (37.2%). Hemodynamic treatment was applied earlier in patients who presented hypotension initially. Antibiotics were administered 48 min later in non-hypotensive sepsis (p = 0.08). A higher proportion of patients without initial hypotension required admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) (43.1% for patients initially hypotensive vs. 56.9% in those initially non-hypotensive, p < 0.05). Initial hypotension was not associated with mortality. A delay in door-to-antibiotic administration time was associated with mortality [OR 1.150, 95%CI: 1.043–1.268). Conclusions: Initial management of patients with community-onset severe sepsis differed according to their clinical presentation. Initial hypotension was associated with early hemodynamic management and less ICU requirement. A non-significant delay was observed in the administration of antibiotics to initially non-hypotensive patients. The time of door-to-antibiotic administration was related to mortality.

CJEM ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 112-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamara McColl ◽  
Mathieu Gatien ◽  
Lisa Calder ◽  
Krishan Yadav ◽  
Ryan Tam ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundIn 2008–2009, the Canadian Institute for Health Information reported over 30,000 cases of sepsis hospitalizations in Canada, an increase of almost 4,000 from 2005. Mortality rates from severe sepsis and septic shock continue to remain greater than 30% in Canada and are significantly higher than other critical conditions treated in the emergency department (ED). Our group formed a multidisciplinary sepsis committee, conducted an ED process of care analysis, and developed a quality improvement protocol. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of this sepsis management bundle on patient mortality.MethodsThis before and after study was conducted in two large Canadian tertiary care EDs and included adult patients with suspected severe infection that met at least two systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria. We studied the implementation of a sepsis bundle including triage flagging, RN medical directive, education campaign, and a modified sepsis protocol. The primary outcomes were 30-day all-cause mortality and sepsis protocol use.ResultsWe included a total of 167 and 185 patients in the pre- and post-intervention analysis, respectively. Compared to the pre-intervention group, mortality was significantly lower in the post-intervention group (30.7% versus 17.3%; absolute difference, 13.4%; 95% CI 9.8–17.0; p=0.006). There was also a higher rate of sepsis protocol use in the post-intervention group (20.3% versus 80.5%, absolute difference 60.2%; 95% CI 55.1–65.3; p<0.001). Additionally, we found shorter time-intervals from triage to MD assessment, fluid resuscitation, and antibiotic administration as well as lower rates of vasopressor requirements and ICU admission.InterpretationThe implementation of our multidisciplinary ED sepsis bundle, including improved early identification and protocolized medical care, was associated with improved time to achieve key therapeutic interventions and a reduction in 30-day mortality. Similar low-cost initiatives could be implemented in other EDs to potentially improve outcomes for this high-risk group of patients.


2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Anne LaRosa ◽  
Noeen Ahmad ◽  
Monica Feinberg ◽  
Monica Shah ◽  
Roseann DiBrienza ◽  
...  

Introduction. Diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines, organized as sepsis bundles, have been shown to improve mortality, but timely and consistent implementation of these can be challenging. Our study examined the use of a screening tool and an early alert system to improve bundle compliance and mortality.Methods. A screening tool was used to identify patients with severe sepsis or septic shock and an overhead alert system known as Code SMART (Sepsis Management Alert Response Team) was activated at the physician’s discretion. Data was collected for 6 months and compliance with bundle completion and mortality were compared between the Code SMART and non-Code SMART groups.Results.Fifty eight patients were enrolled −34 Code SMART and 24 non-Code SMART. The Code SMART group achieved greater compliance with timely antibiotic administration (P<0.001), lactate draw (P<0.001), and steroid use (P=0.02). Raw survival and survival adjusted for age, leucopenia, and severity of illness scores, were greater in the Code SMART group (P<0.05,P=0.03, andP=0.01).Conclusions. A screening tool and an alert system can improve compliance with sepsis bundle elements and improve survival from severe sepsis and septic shock.


2016 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-88.e1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bethany A. Kalich ◽  
Jennifer M. Maguire ◽  
Stacy L. Campbell-Bright ◽  
Abhi Mehrotra ◽  
Tom Caffey ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ling Fei Tee ◽  
Toh Leong Tan ◽  
Hui-min Neoh ◽  
Rahman Jamal

AbstractSepsis is a life-threatening condition which could be alleviated by rapid diagnosis and appropriate antibiotic administration. However, currently available laboratory tests for sepsis diagnosis lacks sensitivity and specificity; they also have long turn-around times. In this proof-of-concept study, the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans was used as a biological sensor to detect urine of sepsis patients in an assay designated as the C. elegans Sepsis Detection Assay (CESDA). From January to June 2016, 45 patients who were admitted to the Emergency Department of a university hospital due to suspected sepsis were included into the study. Urine samples were obtained from these patients and healthy controls and spotted onto CESDA assay plates. Subsequently, C. elegans were aliquoted onto the centre of the plates and allowed to migrate freely. Number of worms found in either spots or quadrants of the plates containing control or suspected sepsis samples were scored in 10 minute intervals in a 60-minute duration. The CESDA index was then calculated for each sample, where an index near +1 represented attraction of the worms towards the sample, while an index near -1 signified repulsion. Confirmatory diagnosis for suspected sepsis samples was determined using a combination of clinical criteria assessment and standard laboratory protocols. All patients who were positive for sepsis were found to have a CESDA index of > 0.1 (positive predictive value, PPV ≥87%). In addition, the worms were able to differentiate urine of sepsis patients from control as early as 20 minutes (p=0.012). Interestingly, the assay was also able to identify infection within 40 minutes of the test (AUROC = 0.80, p= 0.016). The rapidity of CESDA in sepsis and infection identification as well as the usability of urine samples which are non-invasive towards the patient in this method makes it an interesting protocol to be further explored for sepsis diagnosis.


2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Min Joo ◽  
Minjung Kathy Chae ◽  
Sung Yeon Hwang ◽  
Sang-Chan Jin ◽  
Tae Rim Lee ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document