General practitioners' views and experiences in caring for patients after sepsis: a qualitative interview study

[Factors that influence the use of sepsis-related competencies in health professionals and how they promote their patients' sepsis knowledge: Results of a mixed methods study with health professionals]

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is a life-threatening and relatively common emergency which is often recognized too late or not at all. Therefore, the "SepsisWissen" (SepsisKnowledge) project aimed to bring about changes in health care professionals' behavior in the area of sepsis prevention and early detection. It addressed the health care professionals themselves (e. g., their own vaccination, hygiene and early detection behavior) and their patient counseling behavior. To promote this behavior, the SepsisWissen campaign included offers such as trainings or print products. The subsequent core question is: From the health professionals' perspective, which barriers and facilitators affect their own application of sepsis competence and their promotion of their patients' sepsis competence?

METHODS

This paper was based on a cross-sectional mixed-methods study part of "SepsisWissen" withPart a) was analyzed using qualitative oriented content analysis based on Mayring, part b) was analyzed descriptively. The interviewees included physicians, nurses, pharmacists, assistants to physicians and pharmacists and, additionally, one paramedic in the quantitative sample. Some of them had attended "SepsisWissen" trainings.

RESULTS

The qualitative data analysis identified 41 conducive and hindering factors, which can be assigned to the following eight major topics: 1) syndrome sepsis; 2) predisposing factors for health professionals' own acquisition and application of sepsis competence; 3) enabling factors for health professionals themselves; 4) behavior and lifestyle of patients; 5) reinforcing factors for patients; 6) public health education; 7) political, administrative, and organizational context; 8) environmental factors. In the qualitative and quantitative surveys, the suggestion to improve the sepsis competence of the population and to reduce misinformation, respectively, through public education (e.g., via schools or the media).

DISCUSSION

Sepsis training for health professionals was considered as a facilitating factor for taking potential sepsis symptoms and patients' respective statements more seriously. Future training formats should convey more explicitly how health professionals can better communicate their own sepsis knowledge to their patients. They request instruments to support their communication, such as checklists for lay persons. According to the interviews, health workers themselves need recurring external reminders for the topic of sepsis. Organizational and political conditions should be improved. From the health professionals' point of view, it is essential to offer better reimbursement for prevention and counseling services and to allocate adequate time resources for both.

CONCLUSION

Health professionals could increase their potential to apply and promote sepsis competence if general conditions were optimized. From their perspective, it is most important to relieve them of some of their patient counselling burden by initiating more public education.

Models of intensive care unit follow-up care and feasibility of intervention delivery: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The optimal model of outpatient intensive care unit (ICU) follow-up care remains uncertain, and there is limited evidence of benefit.

RESEARCH QUESTION

The objective of this research is to describe existing models of outpatient ICU follow-up care, quantify participant recruitment and retention, and describe facilitators of patient engagement.

STUDY DESIGN & METHODS

A systematic search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was undertaken in June 2021. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts against eligibility criteria. Studies of adults with any outpatient ICU follow-up were included. Studies were excluded if published before 1990, not published in English, or of paediatric patients. Quantitative data were extracted using predefined data fields. Key themes were extracted from qualitative studies. Risk of bias was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 531 studies were screened. Forty-seven studies (32 quantitative and 15 qualitative studies) with a total of 5998 participants were included. Of 33 quantitative study interventions, the most frequently reported model of care was in-person hospital-based interventions (n = 27), with 10 hybrid (part in-hospital, part remote) interventions. Literature was limited for interventions without hospital attendance (n = 6), including telehealth and diaries. The median ranges of rates of recruitment, rates of intervention delivery, and retention to outcome assessment for hospital-based interventions were 51.5% [24-94%], 61.9% [8-100%], and 52% [8.1-82%], respectively. Rates were higher for interventions without hospital attendance: 82.6% [60-100%], 68.5% [59-89%], and 75% [54-100%]. Facilitators of engagement included patient-perceived value of follow-up, continuity of care, intervention accessibility and flexibility, and follow-up design. Studies had a moderate risk of bias.

INTERPRETATION

Models of post-ICU care without in-person attendance at the index hospital potentially have higher rates of recruitment, intervention delivery success, and increased participant retention when compared to hospital-based interventions.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42021260279.

Care pathways of sepsis survivors: sequelae, mortality and use of healthcare services in France, 2015-2018

BACKGROUND

Individuals who survive sepsis are at high risk of chronic sequelae, resulting in significant health-economic costs. Several studies have focused on aspects of healthcare pathways of sepsis survivors but comprehensive, longitudinal overview of their pathways of care are scarce. The aim of this retrospective, longitudinal cohort study is to identify sepsis survivor profiles based on their healthcare pathways and describe their healthcare consumption and costs over the 3 years following their index hospitalization.

METHODS

The data were extracted from the French National Hospital Discharge Database. The study population included all patients above 15 years old, with bacterial sepsis, who survived an incident hospitalization in an acute care facility in 2015. To identify survivor profiles, state sequence and clustering analyses were conducted over the year following the index hospitalization. For each profile, patient characteristics and their index hospital stay and sequelae were described, as well as use of care and its associated monetary costs, both pre- and post-sepsis.

RESULTS

New medical (79.2%), psychological (26.9%) and cognitive (18.5%) impairments were identified post-sepsis, and 65.3% of survivors were rehospitalized in acute care. Cumulative mortality reached 36.6% by 3 years post-sepsis. The total medical cost increased by 856 million € in the year post-sepsis. Five patient clusters were identified: home (65.6% of patients), early death (12.9%), late death (6.8%), short-term rehabilitation (11.3%) and long-term rehabilitation (3.3%). Survivors with early and late death clusters had high rates of cancer and primary bacteremia and experienced more hospital-at-home care post-sepsis. Survivors in short- or long-term rehabilitation clusters were older, with higher percentage of septic shock than those coming back home, and had high rates of multiple site infections and higher rates of new psychological and cognitive impairment.

CONCLUSIONS

Over three years post-sepsis, different profiles of sepsis survivors were identified with different mortality rates, sequels and healthcare services usage and cost. This study confirmed the importance of sepsis burden and suggests that strategies of post-discharge care, in accordance with patient profile, should be further tested in order to reduce sepsis burden.

Hospital Discharge Summaries Are Insufficient Following ICU Stays: A Qualitative Study

Primary care providers (PCPs) receive limited information about their patients' ICU stays; we sought to understand what additional information PCPs desire to support patients' recovery following critical illness.

DESIGN

Semistructured interviews with PCPs conducted between September 2020 and April 2021.

SETTING

Academic health system with central quaternary-care hospital and associated Veterans Affairs medical center.

SUBJECTS

Fourteen attending internal medicine or family medicine physicians working in seven clinics across Southeast Michigan (median, 10.5 yr in practice).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

We analyzed using a modified Rigorous and Accelerated Data Reduction (RADaR) technique to identify gaps in current discharge summaries for patients with ICU stays, impacts of these gaps, and desired ICU-specific information. We employed RADaR to efficiently consolidate data in Excel Microsoft (Redmond, WA) tables across multiple formats (lists, themes, etc.).

RESULTS

PCPs reported receiving limited ICU-specific information in hospital discharge summaries. PCPs often spent significant time reading inpatient records for additional information. Information desired included life-support interventions provided and duration (mechanical ventilation, dialysis, etc.), reasons for treatment decisions (code status changes, medication changes, etc.), and potential complications (delirium, dysphagia, postintensive care syndrome, etc.). Pervasive discharge gaps (ongoing needs, incidental findings, etc.) were described as worse among patients with ICU stays due to more complex illness and required interventions. Insufficient information was felt to lead to incomplete follow-up on critical issues, PCP frustration, and patient harm. PCPs stated that the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated gaps due to decreased staffing, limited visitation policies, and reliance on telehealth follow-up visits.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Our results identified key data elements sought by PCPs about patients' ICU stays and suggest opportunities to improve care through developing tools/templates to provide PCPs with ICU-specific information for outpatient follow-up.

[White Paper - Improving the care of patients with impairments following sepsis and infections]

Hundreds of thousands of individuals who experience lasting sequelae after sepsis and infections in Germany do not receive optimal care. In this White Paper we present measures for improvement, which were developed by a multidisciplinary expect panel as part of the SEPFROK project. Improved care rests on four pillars: 1. cross-sectoral assessment of sequelae and a structured discharge and transition management, 2. interdisciplinary rehabilitation and aftercare with structural support, 3. strengthening the specific health literacy of patients and families, and 4. increased research into causes, prevention and treatment of sequelae. To achieve this, appropriate cross-sectoral care structures and legal frameworks must be created.