Early recognition of sepsis through emergency medical services pre-hospital screening

Sepsis Alert Systems, Mortality, and Adherence in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Early detection and management of sepsis are crucial for patient survival. Emergency departments (EDs) play a key role in sepsis management but face challenges in timely response due to high patient volumes. Sepsis alert systems are proposed to expedite diagnosis and treatment initiation per the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines.

Objective

To review and analyze the association of sepsis alert systems in EDs with patient outcomes.

Data Sources

A thorough search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from January 1, 2004, to November 19, 2023.

Study Selection

Studies that evaluated sepsis alert systems specifically designed for adult ED patients were evaluated. Inclusion criteria focused on peer-reviewed, full-text articles in English that reported on mortality, ICU admissions, hospital stay duration, and sepsis management adherence. Exclusion criteria included studies that lacked a control group or quantitative reports.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Two independent reviewers conducted the data extraction using a standardized form. Any disagreements were resolved through discussion. The data were synthesized using a random-effects model due to the expected heterogeneity among the included studies.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Key outcomes included mortality, intensive care unit admissions, hospital stay duration, and adherence to the sepsis bundle.

Results

Of 3281 initially identified studies, 22 (0.67%) met inclusion criteria, encompassing 19 580 patients. Sepsis alert systems were associated with reduced mortality risk (risk ratio [RR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.91) and length of hospital stay (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.15; 95% CI, -0.20 to -0.11). These systems were also associated with better adherence to sepsis bundle elements, notably in terms of shorter time to fluid administration (SMD, -0.42; 95% CI, -0.52 to -0.32), blood culture (SMD, -0.31; 95% CI, -0.40 to -0.21), antibiotic administration (SMD, -0.34; 95% CI, -0.39 to -0.29), and lactate measurement (SMD, -0.15; 95% CI, -0.22 to -0.08). Electronic alerts were particularly associated with reduced mortality (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.92) and adherence with blood culture guidelines (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.27).

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that sepsis alert systems in EDs were associated with better patient outcomes along with better adherence to sepsis management protocols. These systems hold promise for enhancing ED responses to sepsis, potentially leading to better patient outcomes.

Prehospital early warning scores for adults with suspected sepsis: the PHEWS observational cohort and decision-analytic modelling study

Background

Guidelines for sepsis recommend treating those at highest risk within 1 hour. The emergency care system can only achieve this if sepsis is recognised and prioritised. Ambulance services can use prehospital early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to prioritise patients for treatment or early assessment in the emergency department.

Objectives

To determine the accuracy, impact and cost-effectiveness of using early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to identify sepsis requiring urgent treatment.

Design

Retrospective diagnostic cohort study and decision-analytic modelling of operational consequences and cost-effectiveness.

Setting

Two ambulance services and four acute hospitals in England.

Participants

Adults transported to hospital by emergency ambulance, excluding episodes with injury, mental health problems, cardiac arrest, direct transfer to specialist services, or no vital signs recorded.

Interventions

Twenty-one early warning scores used alongside paramedic diagnostic impression, categorised as sepsis, infection, non-specific presentation, or other specific presentation.

Main outcome measures

Proportion of cases prioritised at the four hospitals; diagnostic accuracy for the sepsis-3 definition of sepsis and receiving urgent treatment (primary reference standard); daily number of cases with and without sepsis prioritised at a large and a small hospital; the minimum treatment effect associated with prioritisation at which each strategy would be cost-effective, compared to no prioritisation, assuming willingness to pay £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained.

Results

Data from 95,022 episodes involving 71,204 patients across four hospitals showed that most early warning scores operating at their pre-specified thresholds would prioritise more than 10% of cases when applied to non-specific attendances or all attendances. Data from 12,870 episodes at one hospital identified 348 (2.7%) with the primary reference standard. The National Early Warning Score, version 2 (NEWS2), had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve when applied only to patients with a paramedic diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection (0.756, 95% confidence interval 0.729 to 0.783) or sepsis alone (0.655, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.68). None of the strategies provided high sensitivity (> 0.8) with acceptable positive predictive value (> 0.15). NEWS2 provided combinations of sensitivity and specificity that were similar or superior to all other early warning scores. Applying NEWS2 to paramedic diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection with thresholds of > 4, > 6 and > 8 respectively provided sensitivities and positive predictive values (95% confidence interval) of 0.522 (0.469 to 0.574) and 0.216 (0.189 to 0.245), 0.447 (0.395 to 0.499) and 0.274 (0.239 to 0.313), and 0.314 (0.268 to 0.365) and 0.333 (confidence interval 0.284 to 0.386). The mortality relative risk reduction from prioritisation at which each strategy would be cost-effective exceeded 0.975 for all strategies analysed.

Limitations

We estimated accuracy using a sample of older patients at one hospital. Reliable evidence was not available to estimate the effectiveness of prioritisation in the decision-analytic modelling.

Conclusions

No strategy is ideal but using NEWS2, in patients with a paramedic diagnostic impression of infection or sepsis could identify one-third to half of sepsis cases without prioritising unmanageable numbers. No other score provided clearly superior accuracy to NEWS2. Research is needed to develop better definition, diagnosis and treatments for sepsis.

Study registration

This study is registered as Research Registry (reference: researchregistry5268).

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/136/10) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 16. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Prehospital early warning scores for adults with suspected sepsis: retrospective diagnostic cohort study

BACKGROUND

Ambulance services need to identify and prioritise patients with sepsis for early hospital assessment. We aimed to determine the accuracy of early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to identify sepsis that required urgent treatment.

METHODS

We undertook a retrospective diagnostic cohort study involving adult emergency medical cases transported to Sheffield Teaching Hospitals ED by Yorkshire Ambulance Service in 2019. We used routine ambulance service data to calculate 21 early warning scores and categorise paramedic diagnostic impressions as sepsis, infection, non-specific presentation or other presentation. We linked cases to hospital records and identified those meeting the sepsis-3 definition who received urgent hospital treatment for sepsis (reference standard). Analysis determined the accuracy of strategies that combined early warning scores at varying thresholds for positivity with paramedic diagnostic impression.

RESULTS

We linked 12 870/24 955 (51.6%) cases and identified 348/12 870 (2.7%) with a positive reference standard. None of the strategies provided sensitivity greater than 0.80 with positive predictive value greater than 0.15. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the National Early Warning Score, version 2 (NEWS2) applied to patients with a diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection was 0.756 (95% CI 0.729, 0.783). No other early warning score provided clearly superior accuracy to NEWS2. Paramedic impression of sepsis or infection had sensitivity of 0.572 (0.519, 0.623) and positive predictive value of 0.156 (0.137, 0.176). NEWS2 thresholds of >4, >6 and >8 applied to patients with a diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection, respectively, provided sensitivities and positive predictive values of 0.522 (0.469, 0.574) and 0.216 (0.189, 0.245), 0.447 (0.395, 0.499) and 0.274 (0.239, 0.313), and 0.314 (0.268, 0.365) and 0.333 (0.284, 0.386).

CONCLUSION

No strategy is ideal but using NEWS2 alongside paramedic diagnostic impression of infection or sepsis could identify one-third to half of sepsis cases without prioritising unmanageable numbers. No other score provided clearly superior accuracy to NEWS2.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

researchregistry5268, https://www.researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry%23home/registrationdetails/5de7bbd97ca5b50015041c33/.

Impact of Prehospital Antibiotics on in-Hospital Mortality in Emergency Medical Service Patients with Sepsis

Background

Sepsis is a life-threatening medical condition that requires early recognition and timely management to improve patient outcomes and reduce mortality rates. Administering antibiotics in the prehospital setting can be effective to reduce the time to antibiotic therapy, which may be crucial for sepsis patients. However, the impact of prehospital antibiotics on mortality in sepsis patients remains uncertain, and the current evidence to support this practice in middle-income countries is particularly limited.

Methods

This was a single-center, retrospective-prospective cohort study aimed at determining the impact of prehospital antibiotics on in-hospital mortality rates among adult patients with sepsis. The study included patients who received care from the advanced level of Emergency Medical Service between June 2020 and October 2022 and compared the mortality rates of patients who received prehospital antibiotics with those of their counterparts who did not.

Results

In this study, 180 patients with a mean age of 71.6 ± 15.7 years were included, of whom 68.9% experienced respiratory infections. The results demonstrated that the prehospital antibiotic group had a significantly lower in-hospital mortality rate (32.2%) than the non-prehospital antibiotic group (47.8%; p=0.034). After adjusting for confounding factors, the odds ratio was 0.304 (95% CI: 0.11, 0.82; p=0.018), indicating a 69.6% lower incidence of in-hospital mortality in the prehospital antibiotic group. Furthermore, the prehospital antibiotic group received antibiotics significantly earlier (16.0 ± 7.4 minutes) than the non-prehospital group (50.9 ± 29.4 minutes; p<0.001).

Conclusion

This study provides evidence to support the administration of antibiotics to sepsis patients in the prehospital setting, as this practice can reduce mortality rates. However, larger, multicenter studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the potential benefits of prehospital antibiotics in improving patient outcomes.

Prehospital Recognition and Management of Pediatric Sepsis: A Qualitative Assessment

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Sepsis is a life-threatening disease in children and is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Early prehospital recognition and management of children with sepsis may have significant effects on the timely resuscitation of this high-risk clinical condition. However, the care of acutely ill and injured children in the prehospital setting can be challenging. This study aims to understand barriers, facilitators, and attitudes regarding recognition and management of pediatric sepsis in the prehospital setting.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study of EMS professionals participating in focus groups using a grounded theory-based design to gather information on recognition and management of septic children in the prehospital setting. Focus groups were held for EMS administrators and medical directors. Separate focus groups were held for field clinicians. Focus groups were conducted via video conference until saturation of ideas was reached. Using consensus methodology, transcripts were coded in an iterative process. Data were then organized into positive and negative factors based on the validated PRECEDE-PROCEED model for behavioral change.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight participants in six focus groups identified nine environmental factors, 21 negative factors, and 14 positive factors pertaining to recognition and management of pediatric sepsis. These findings were organized into the PRECEDE-PROCEED planning model. Pediatric sepsis guidelines were identified as positive factors when they did exist and negative factors when they were complicated or did not exist. Six interventions were identified by participants. These include raising awareness of pediatric sepsis, increasing pediatric education, receiving feedback on prehospital encounters, increasing pediatric exposure and skills training, and improving dispatch information.

CONCLUSION

This study fills a gap by examining barriers and facilitators to prehospital diagnosis and management of pediatric sepsis. Using the PRECEDE-PROCEED model, nine environmental factors, 21 negative factors, and 14 positive factors were identified. Participants identified six interventions that could create the foundation to improve prehospital pediatric sepsis care. Policy changes were suggested by the research team based on the results of this study. These interventions and policy changes provide a roadmap for improving care in this population and lay the groundwork for future research.

Evaluation of the PRESEP Score and the Miami Sepsis Score for Prehospital Sepsis Screening

INTRODUCTION

Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated response to an infection that requires early intervention. Prehospital sepsis screening tools have not yet been widely evaluated for their performance in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the ability of the Prehospital Early Sepsis Detection (PRESEP) score and the Miami Sepsis Score to predict sepsis in prehospital settings.

METHOD

This retrospective analysis included patients with diseases of internal cause who were transported by emergency medical services (EMS) to the hospital and hospitalized between January and June 2020. Data were extracted from the medical and EMS records. The primary outcome was sepsis diagnosis within 48 h of admission. The predictive abilities of the scores were assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LRs) were calculated at cutoff values derived using Youden's index.

RESULTS

Data from 354 patients were analyzed. The AUC for the PRESEP score was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.88) while that for the Miami Sepsis Score was 0.80 (0.75-0.85). The sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, and negative LR for the PRESEP score (cutoff was 5) were 0.83 (0.73-0.90), 0.68 (0.62-0.73), 2.59 (2.12-3.16), and 0.25 (0.15-0.40), respectively, and those for the Miami Sepsis Score (cu-off was 3) were 0.81 (0.71-0.89), 0.65 (0.59-0.71), 2.33 (1.93-2.83), and 0.30 (0.19-0.46), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Due to their relatively good predictive abilities to detect septic patients and simplicities, the PRESEP and Miami Sepsis Scores could be used for screening patients for sepsis in prehospital settings. Further prospective validation and evaluation of effect on clinical outcomes are needed.

Effect of prehospital transportation on 24-h fluid volume, a post hoc analysis of a multicenter, prospective, observational study on fluid volumes in patients with suspected infection

Introduction

Infections, including sepsis, are leading causes of death and fluid administration is part of the treatment. The optimal fluid therapy remains controversial. If the patient is transported by Emergency Medical Services (EMS), fluids can be initiated during transportation, which may result in increased overall fluid administration and fluid overload, which may be harmful. The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of EMS transportation on 24-h fluid administration in patients with suspected infection.

Methods

This is a post hoc study of a prospective, multicenter, observational study, conducted in three Danish Emergency Departments (EDs), 20 January-2 March 2020, aiming at describing fluid administration in patients with suspected infection. Patients were stratified into the groups: simple infection or sepsis, in accordance with SEPSIS-3-guidelines. The primary outcome of the current study was 24-h total fluid volume (oral and intravenous) stratified by transportation mode to the EDs.

Main results

Total 24-h fluids were registered for 734 patients. Patients with simple infection or sepsis arriving by EMS (n = 388, 54%) received mean 3,774 ml (standard deviation [SD]: 1900) and non-EMS received 3,627 ml (SD: 1568); mean difference (MD) was 303 ml [95% CI: 32; 573] adjusted for age, site, and total SOFA-score. Patients brought in by EMS received more intravenous fluids (MD: 621 ml [95% CI: 378; 864]) and less oral fluids (MD: -474 ml [95% CI: -616; -333]) than non-EMS patients.

Conclusion

Patients transported by EMS received more intravenous fluids and less oral fluids but overall, more fluid in total in the first 24-h than non-EMS after adjusting for age, site and SOFA-score.

Clinical Value of the Lactate/Albumin Ratio and Lactate/Albumin Ratio × Age Score in the Assessment of Prognosis in Patients With Sepsis

Objective: To examine the clinical significance of the blood lactate (Lac)/serum albumin (Alb) ratio and the Lac/Alb × age score for assessing the severity and prognosis of patients with sepsis.

Methods: A total of 8,029 patients with sepsis, aged >18 years were enrolled between June 2001 to October 2012 from the latest version of the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III (MIMIC-III v.1.4). The general data of the patients were obtained from hospital records and included gender, age, body mass index (BMI), laboratory indices, the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, and simplified acute physiology score II (SAPS II). The patients were graded and scored according to their age and then divided into a survival or death group based on their prognosis. The Lac/Alb ratio after ICU admission was calculated and compared between the two groups. The risk factors for death in patients with sepsis were determined using multivariate logistic regression analysis, while mortality was examined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and survival curve plots. Finally, the values of the Lac/Alb ratio and Lac/Alb × age score for assessing prognosis of patients with sepsis were analyzed and compared.

Results: After items with default values were excluded, a total of 4,555 patients with sepsis were enrolled (2,526 males and 2,029 females). 2,843 cases were classified as the death group and 1,712 cases in the survival group. (1) The mean age, BMI, SOFA and SAPS II scores were higher in the death group than those in the survival group. Significant differences in baseline data between the two groups were also observed. (2) The patients in the death group were divided further into four subgroups according to the quartile of the Lac/Alb ratio from low to high. Comparison of the four subgroups showed that the death rate rose with an increase in the Lac/Alb ratio, while analysis of the survival curve revealed that patients with a higher Lac/Alb ratio had a worse prognosis. (3) Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that age ≥ 60 years, overweight (BMI ≥ 24 kg/m²), Lac/Alb ratio ≥ 0.16, SOFA score ≥ 2 points, and SAPS II ≥ 40 points were independent risk factors for death in patients with septic. (4) ROC curve analysis indicated that the SAPS II, Lac/Alb x age score, SOFA, and Lac/Alb ratio were the best predictors of death in patients with sepsis. The Lac/Alb × age score was characterized by its simple acquisition and ability to quickly analyze the prognosis of patients.

Conclusion: (1)A high Lac/Alb ratio is an independent risk factor for death in patients with sepsis. (2) Although the prognosis of sepsis can be accurately and comprehensively assessed by multi-dimensional analysis of multiple indices, the Lac/Alb×age score is more accurate and convenient for providing a general assessment of prognosis, so is worthy of further clinical recognition.

Accuracy of prehospital point-of-care lactate in early in-hospital mortality

BACKGROUND

Emergency medical services (EMS) routinely face complex scenarios where decisions should be taken with limited clinical information. The development of fast, reliable and easy to perform warning biomarkers could help in such decision-making processes. The present study aims at characterizing the validity of point-of-care lactate (pLA) during prehospital tasks for predicting in-hospital mortality within two days after the EMS assistance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective, multicentric, ambulance-based and controlled observational study without intervention, including six advanced life support and five hospitals. The pLA levels were recorded during EMS assistance of adult patients. The validity of pLA to determine the in-hospital mortality was assessed by the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating curve (ROC).

RESULTS

A total of 2997 patients were considered in the study, with a median of 69 years (IQR 54-81) and 41.4% of women. The median pLA value was 2.7 mmol/L (1.9-3.8) in survivors and 5.7 mmol/L (4.4-7.6) in nonsurvivors. The global discrimination level of pLA reached an AUC of 0.867, being 1.9 mmol/L and 4 mmol/L the cut-off point for low and high mortality. The discrimination value of pLA was not affected by sex, age or pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results highlight the clinical importance of prehospital pLA to determine the in-hospital risk of mortality. The incorporation of pLA into the EMS protocols could improve the early identification of risky patients, leading to a better care of such patients.

Implementing a Statewide Prehospital Sepsis Protocol: Perspectives of Emergency Medical Services Medical Directors

Background

Sepsis is a medical emergency that requires prompt recognition and treatment. Multiple Emergency Medical Services (EMS) agencies across the United States have implemented sepsis protocols. In 2016, Maryland instituted its own state-wide EMS sepsis protocol which includes fluid resuscitation, vasopressor administration, and requires alerting the hospital of an incoming sepsis patient.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to quantify the perspectives of EMS medical directors in Maryland regarding prehospital sepsis care and to identify challenges encountered during the implementation of the statewide sepsis protocol.

Methods

A 17-question survey was sent to all 24 jurisdictional medical directors in the state of Maryland.

Results

A total of 14 (58%) medical directors responded, representing four of the five EMS regions in the state. More than half (57%) stated sepsis alerting was a priority in their jurisdiction; however, in a listing of eight initiatives, sepsis was the least prioritized. Most (64%) respondents believed their clinicians had adequate training on sepsis. A majority (79%) of medical directors surveyed felt that core measures of sepsis management would be beneficial. The potentially most helpful core measures were the volume of IV fluid administration (92%), true positive sepsis alerts (83%), and cases of failure to activate a sepsis alert (75%). Engagement of field personnel was rated as the biggest challenge for the implementation of a sepsis protocol in general, and lack of a thermometer on EMS units (50%) was the largest hurdle specifically in the 2016 statewide sepsis protocol. Surveyed medical directors (86%) believe the most difficult obstacle to overcome for EMS clinicians in the treatment of sepsis are nonspecific signs and symptoms.

Conclusions

Prehospital sepsis care was viewed to be important amongst the medical directors surveyed. However, significant challenges to implementation of a sepsis protocol and delivery of prehospital sepsis care are perceived by jurisdictional medical directors. Additional investment and dedication to sepsis care will advance prehospital sepsis treatment in Maryland.

Association between serum lactate levels and enteral feeding intolerance in septic patients treated with vasopressors: a retrospective cohort study

Background

To assess the association between serum lactate levels and intolerance to enteral nutrition (EN) in septic patients treated with vasopressors.

Methods

This retrospective study was conducted between January 1, 2015 and May 1, 2018 in an intensive care unit (ICU). Patients with sepsis who were given EN and treated with vasopressors were included. EmpowerStats software and R (version 3.3.2) was used to examine the association between serum lactate levels and intolerance to EN.

Results

Among the 132 septic patients (age, 60.6±18.1 years) enrolled, 35 (26.5%) patients suffered intolerance to EN. Multiple logistic regression analysis demonstrated that an elevated lactate level was an independent risk factor for EN intolerance [odds ratio (OR): 2.7; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.6–4.4; P<0.001]. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for serum lactate levels was 0.764 (95% CI: 0.664–0.864). Stratified analysis suggested that age was the most prominent interactive factor for serum lactate levels in EN intolerance. Serum lactate levels were closely correlated to EN intolerance in elderly patients (age ≥65 years) (OR: 9.5; 95% CI: 2.1–42.4; P=0.0261 for interaction), while no such association was identified in younger patients (age <65 years; OR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.0–2.9; P=0.052).

Conclusions

Serum lactate levels were associated with an increased risk of EN intolerance in patients with sepsis, especially in elderly individuals. An elevated serum lactate level may be an early predictor of EN intolerance in elderly septic patients treated with vasopressors. However, further studies are called for to verify these findings.

Screening strategies to identify sepsis in the prehospital setting: a validation study

BACKGROUND

In the prehospital setting, differentiating patients who have sepsis from those who have infection but no organ dysfunction is important to initiate sepsis treatments appropriately. We aimed to identify which published screening strategies for paramedics to use in identifying patients with sepsis provide the most certainty for prehospital diagnosis.

METHODS

We identified published strategies for screening by paramedics through a literature search. We then conducted a validation study in Alberta, Canada, from April 2015 to March 2016. For adult patients (≥ 18 yr) who were transferred by ambulance, we linked records to an administrative database and then restricted the search to patients with infection diagnosed in the emergency department. For each patient, the classification from each strategy was determined and compared with the diagnosis recorded in the emergency department. For all strategies that generated numeric scores, we constructed diagnostic prediction models to estimate the probability of sepsis being diagnosed in the emergency department.

RESULTS

We identified 21 unique prehospital screening strategies, 14 of which had numeric scores. We linked a total of 131 745 eligible patients to hospital databases. No single strategy had both high sensitivity (overall range 0.02-0.85) and high specificity (overall range 0.38-0.99) for classifying sepsis. However, the Critical Illness Prediction (CIP) score, the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and the Quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score predicted a low to high probability of a sepsis diagnosis at different scores. The qSOFA identified patients with a 7% (lowest score) to 87% (highest score) probability of sepsis diagnosis.

INTERPRETATION

The CIP, NEWS and qSOFA scores are tools with good predictive ability for sepsis diagnosis in the prehospital setting. The qSOFA score is simple to calculate and may be useful to paramedics in screening patients with possible sepsis.

Resuscitation Resident Impact in the Treatment of Sepsis

Background The resuscitation of septic patients is a fundamental skill of emergency medicine (EM) training. We developed a required rotation designed to augment resident training in resuscitating critically ill patients in the emergency department (ED). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the successful completion of sepsis core measures alongside clinical outcomes between patients with a resuscitation resident (RR) involved in care versus patients without. Methods This retrospective study was conducted at a single site tertiary care Level 1 trauma center with an ED census of 130,000 visits annually. Data were collected from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2016, using the electronic medical record (EMR) via an Epic query (Epic Systems Corp., Verona, WI). Patients admitted with severe sepsis or septic shock (Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines) were included and separated into two groups, one with RR involvement and one without. Emergency department length of stay, time to initial lactic acid draw, lactic acid value, time to bolus fluid initiation, time to antibiotic initiation, need for medical intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and 30-day mortality were compared between the two groups. Chi-square tests and Fisher's exact tests were used to analyze the categorical variables. Two-sided t-tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to examine continuous variables. Results Out of 4,746 patients admitted, 101 patients had an RR participate in their care. The median time to initial lactic acid draw was shorter (0.53 vs 1.05 hours; p < 0. 0001) and the lactic acid level was higher (2.5 vs 1.8 mmol/L; p < 0. 0001) with the presence of an RR. Resuscitation resident was correlated with a decrease in time to antibiotics and appropriate 30 cc/kg bolus, however, these were not statistically significant (p = 0.10 and p = 0.09 respectively). Resuscitation resident involvement was also associated with more medical ICU (45.5% vs 18.8%; p<0.0001) admissions and a higher 30-day mortality (14.9% vs 29.7%; p < 0. 0001). All other variables were not statistically significant. Conclusion Resuscitation residents demonstrate a statistically significant impact on lactic acid-related bundle compliance and help facilitate the care of higher acuity severe sepsis and septic shock patients.

Improving timely sepsis care using the surviving sepsis campaign one-hour bundle in a rural emergency department

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is deadly when not recognized and treated in a timely manner and leads to 270,000 deaths each year in America. Mortality increases eight percent for each hour treatment is delayed. Sepsis-related admission is the most expensive condition in the United States with a median cost per patient of $32,421.

LOCAL PROBLEM

Baseline data for patients with sepsis revealed that only 30% were recognized in triage, only 20% received correct amounts of fluids, and only 45% received antibiotics within one hour. The aim of this project was to improve timely sepsis care to 75% for patients in a rural emergency department within 90 days.

METHODS

A rapid cycle quality improvement project was completed, consisting of four plan-do-study-act cycles over 90 days. Each cycle included tests of change related to team and patient engagement, screening, and the use of timely sepsis orders. Data were collected three times weekly and analyzed using run charts.

INTERVENTIONS

Interventions included screening in triage with positively screened patients receiving participatory education, team handoff communication, a sepsis checklist for nurse-driven orders, and Power Hour for timely care.

RESULTS

Team communication improved to 83%. Patient education exceeded goal, with 100% of patients taking an active role in care. Sepsis screening improved to 100%. The recommended One-Hour Bundle for timely sepsis treatment improved to 83%.

CONCLUSION

The project was successful in improving patient and team engagement, screening, and sepsis care within 1 hour for emergency department patients.

Emergency Medical Services Care and Sepsis Trajectories

Objective: Many sepsis patients receive initial care from prehospital Emergency Medical Services (EMS). While earlier sepsis care improves outcomes, the characteristics, care and outcomes of those treated by EMS versus those arriving directly to an emergency department (ED) are currently not detailed. We sought to determine differences in hospital presentation, course and outcomes between EMS and non-EMS patients enrolled in the Protocolized Care of Early Septic Shock (ProCESS) trial. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of ProCESS, which studied ED patients with septic shock. EMS care was the primary exposure. We determined differences in demographics, clinical features, interventions and hospital course between EMS and non-EMS patients. Using mixed models, we determined the association between EMS care and 60-day mortality. Results: Among 1,341 patients, 826 (61.6%) received initial EMS care. EMS patients were older, more likely to be black (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.14-1.95) or nursing home residents (5.57, 3.61-8.60), and more likely to have chronic respiratory disease (1.36, 1.04-1.78), cerebral vascular disease (1.56; 1.04-2.33), peripheral vascular disease (2.02; 1.29-3.16), and dementia (3.53; 2.04-6.10). EMS patients were more likely to present with coma (4.48; 2.53-7.96) or elevated lactate (1.30; 1.04-1.63), and to receive mechanical ventilation in the ED (7.16; 4.34-11.79). There were no differences in infection source or total intravenous fluids. Initial differences in vasopressor use (1.66; 1.22-2.26) resolved at 6 hours (1.18; 0.94-1.47). Initial differences in APACHE II (EMS 21.8 vs. non-EMS 19.0) narrowed by 48 hours (17.9 vs. 16.3, [EMS X time] interaction p = 0.003). Although EMS patients exhibited higher 60-day mortality, after adjustment for confounders, this association was not significant (1.09, 95% CI: 0.78-1.55). Conclusions: While EMS sepsis patients presented with worse chronic, nonmodifiable characteristics and higher acuity than non-EMS patients, differences in acuity narrowed after initial hospital care. Despite having higher illness burden, EMS patients did not have worse adjusted short-term mortality.

Sepsis is frequent in initially non-critical hypotensive emergency department patients and is associated with increased mortality

OBJECTIVE

Hypotension, defined as a mean arterial pressure of maximum 70 mmHg, is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to determine in initially non-critical hypotensive adult patients the proportion of sepsis and if septic patients had different outcome and clinical factors than non-septic patients.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study was conducted over a year on adult hypotensive emergency department patients initially considered by triage as non-critical. Patients were separated into three groups: hypotensive septic patients (HSP), hypotensive non-septic infected patients (HNSIP), and other hypotensive patients (OHP). Clinical scores, signs, length of stay (LOS), and mortality were compared using analysis of variance for continuous variables and chi-square analysis for categorical variables.

RESULTS

There were 136 (35.5%) septic patients, 37 (9.7%) with non-septic infection, and 210 (54.8%) with another cause of hypotension. Overall in-hospital mortality was 12.0% and total mortality was greater in HSP than in HNSIP (20.6% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.031) or OHP (20.6 vs. 7.6%, p < 0.001). LOS was greater for HSP when compared to HNSIP (median(IQR): 9(6-17) vs. 6(1-13), p = 0.004) and OHP (median(IQR): 9(6-17) vs. 3(1-8) days, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Sepsis in a priori non-critical hypotensive adult patients, when compared with other causes of hypotension, is associated with significantly higher mortality and increased LOS. Patients that present to the emergency department and have a MAP of 70mmHg or less must be rigorously evaluated and have consistent follow-up.