Lack of clinically evident signs of organ failure affects ED treatment of patients with severe sepsis

Use of a Clinical Audit System in Implementing Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines in Patients With Peritonitis

Background

Sepsis is the predominant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with peritonitis. "Surviving Sepsis Campaign" (SSC) is an international effort in reducing mortality based on evidence-based guidelines. This study aims to assess the impact of audit-based feedback in a Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) format on improving the implementation of the SSC guidelines in patients with generalized peritonitis at our center.

Methods

This prospective observational study was conducted in four audit cycles in PDSA format. Multi-departmental inputs were taken to suggest modifications in practice. A questionnaire-based analysis of reasons for non-compliance was performed to find out the opinions and reasons for non-compliance. Morbidity, mortality, and the length of ICU and hospital stay among these patients were also analyzed.

Results

Baseline compliance with intravenous (IV) bolus administration, central venous pressure (CVP)-guided fluids, and inotropes support when indicated were 100%. Over the course of the three audit cycles, statistically significant improvement in compliance was noted for obtaining blood cultures before antibiotics, antibiotic administration within three hours of presentation, and serum lactate measurement. Overall bundle compliance improved from 9.2% to 64.7% by the end of audit cycle III.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that audit-based feedback is a dependable means of improving compliance with SSC guidelines. It brings about improvement by educating users, modifying their behavior through feedback, and enhances process improvement by identifying and correcting systemic deficiencies in the organization.

Changes in the incidence and outcome of multiple organ failure in emergency non-cardiac surgical admissions: a 10-year retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

During the past decades, epidemiologic data of independent predictors of multiple organ failure (MOF), incidence, and mortality have changed. The aim of the study was to assess the potential changes in the incidence and outcomes of MOF for one decade (2008-2017). In addition, resource utilization was considered.

METHODS

Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were adults, admitted to the ICU between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2017, and had complete data sets regarding MOF. MOF was defined as organ failure separately with and without central nervous system (CNS) failure. The onset of MOF was defined as being early (≤48 h of ICU admission) and late (>48 h after ICU admission).

RESULTS

Of a total of 13,270 patients enclosed in this study, 44.6% of the patients developed MOF with and 31.4% without CNS failure. MOF-related mortality decreased in patients with (adjusted IRR 0.972 [95% CI 0.948 to 0.996], P=0.022) and without (adjusted IRR 0.957 [95% CI 0.931 to 0.983], P=0.0013) CNS failure. In addition, the incidence (adjusted IRR 0.970 [95% CI 0.950 to 0.991], P=0.006) and mortality (adjusted IRR 0.968 [95% CI 0.940 to 0.996], P=0.025) of early-onset MOF decreased, while the incidence and mortality of late-onset MOF remained constant. The length of ICU (P=0.024) and hospital (P=0.032) stays decreased while the length of mechanical ventilation remained constant (P=0.41).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite all improvements in intensive care during the last decades, the incidence of late-onset MOF remains a resource-intensive, morbid, and lethal condition. More research on etiologies, signs of organ failure, and where and when to start treatment is needed to improve the prognosis of late-onset MOF.

Prevalence of organ failure and mortality among patients in the emergency department: a population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to describe population-based incidence and emergency department-based prevalence and 1-year all-cause mortality of patients with new organ failure present at arrival.

DESIGN

This was a population-based cohort study of all citizens in four municipalities (population of 230 000 adults).

SETTING

Emergency department at Odense University Hospital, Denmark.

PARTICIPANTS

We included all adult patients who arrived from 1 April 2012 to 31 March 2015.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Organ failure was defined as a modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score≥2 within six possible organ systems: cerebral, circulatory, renal, respiratory, hepatic and coagulation.The primary outcome was prevalence of organ failure, and secondary outcomes were 0-7 days, 8-30 days and 31-365 days all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

We identified in total 175 278 contacts, of which 70 399 contacts were further evaluated for organ failure. Fifty-two per cent of these were women, median age 62 (IQR 42-77) years. The incidence of new organ failure was 1342/100 000 person-years, corresponding to 5.2% of all emergency department contacts.The 0-7-day, 8-30-day and 31-365-day mortality was 11.0% (95% CI: 10.2% to 11.8%), 5.6% (95% CI: 5.1% to 6.2%) and 13.2% (95% CI: 12.3% to 14.1%), respectively, if the patient had one or more new organ failures at first contact in the observation period, compared with 1.4% (95% CI: 1.3% to 1.6%), 1.2% (95% CI: 1.1% to 1.3%) and 5.2% (95% CI: 5.0% to 5.4%) for patients without. Seven-day mortality ranged from hepatic failure, 6.5% (95% CI: 4.9% to 8.6%), to cerebral failure, 33.8% (95% CI: 31.0% to 36.8%), the 8-30-day mortality ranged from cerebral failure, 3.9% (95% CI: 2.8% to 5.3%), to hepatic failure, 8.6% (95% CI: 6.6% to 10.8%) and 31-365-day mortality ranged from cerebral failure, 9.3% (95% CI: 7.6% to 11.2%), to renal failure, 18.2% (95% CI: 15.5% to 21.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

The study revealed an incidence of new organ failure at 1342/100 000 person-years and a prevalence of 5.2% of all emergency department contacts. One-year all-cause mortality was 29.8% among organ failure patients.

Barriers to implementing the Sepsis Six guidelines in an acute hospital setting

AIM

To identify the barriers to implementation of the Sepsis Six pathway.

BACKGROUND

Research has suggested that compliance with the Sepsis Six pathway remains low.

METHODS

A convenience sample of doctors and nurses from one emergency department, two medical wards and two surgical wards were asked to complete a survey questionnaire.

RESULTS

Data from 108 respondents were available for analysis. Doctors and nurses agreed that lack of sepsis recognition during observation rounds and failure to associate sepsis with deranged temperature and blood results acted as barriers to the identification of sepsis. Doctors and nurses agreed that nursing delays and knowledge deficits were the top barriers leading to delay in sepsis treatment.

CONCLUSION

Knowledge deficits, lack of resources and practical issues were barriers identified in this survey. This will inform the educational and process needs of both doctors and nurses in order to improve sepsis care.

Prevalence and prognosis of acutely ill patients with organ failure at arrival to hospital: A systematic review

Introduction

Patients in an emergency department are diverse. Some are more seriously ill than others and some even arrive in multi-organ failure. Knowledge of the prevalence of organ failure and its prognosis in unselected patients is important from a diagnostic, hospital planning, and from a quality evaluation point of view, but is not reported systematically.

Objectives

To analyse the prevalence and prognosis of new onset organ failure in unselected acute patients at arrival to hospital.

Methods

A systematic review of studies of prevalence and prognosis of acutely ill patients with organ failure at arrival to hospital. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and Cinahl, and read references in included studies. Two authors decided independently on study eligibility and extracted data. Results were summarised qualitatively.

Results

Four studies were included with a total of 678,960 patients. The number of different organ failures reported in the studies ranged from one to six, and the settings were emergency departments and wards. The definitions of organ failure varied between studies. The prevalence of organ failure was 7%, 14%, 14%, and 23%, and in-hospital mortality was 5%, 11% and 15% respectively. The relative risk of in-hospital mortality for patients with organ failure compared to patients without organ failure varied from 2.58 to 8.65. Numbers of organ failures per 1,000 visits varied from 71 to 256.

Conclusion

The results of this review indicate that clinicians have good reasons to be alert when a patient arrives to the emergency department; as a state of organ failure seems both frequent and highly severe.

However, most studies identified were performed in patients after a diagnosis was established, and only very few studies were performed in unselected patients.

Systematic review registration number

PROSPERO: CRD42017060871.

Prevalence and prognosis of acutely ill patients with organ failure at arrival to hospital: protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Acutely ill patients are a heterogeneous group, and some of these suffer from organ failure. As the prognosis of organ failure improves with early treatment, it is important to identify these patients as early as possible. Most studies on organ failure have been performed in intensive care settings, or on selected groups of patients, where a high prevalence and mortality have been reported. Before patients arrive to the intensive care unit, or the general ward, most of them have passed through the emergency department (ED), where diagnosis and treatment has been initiated. The prevalence and prognosis of acutely ill patients, with organ failure, at arrival have been studied in some selected groups, but methods and results differ. This systematic review aims to identify, summarize, and analyze studies of prevalence and prognosis of new onset organ failure in acutely ill undifferentiated patients, at arrival to hospital. The result of the review will assist physicians working in an ED, when assessing patients' risk of organ failure and their associated prognosis.

METHODS

The information sources used are electronic databases, PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and CINAHL; references in included studies and review articles; and authors' personal files. One author will perform the title and abstract screening and exclude obviously ineligible studies. By an independent full-text screening, two authors will decide on the eligibility for the remaining studies. Eligible studies will include an unselected group of acutely ill adult patients at arrival to hospital, with one or more organ failures (respiratory, renal, cerebral, circulatory, hepatic, or coagulation failure). Included studies will have assessed the prevalence or prognosis, defined as mortality or ICU transfer, of new onset organ failure. From included studies, bibliographical and study description data, patient characteristics, and data related to prevalence of organ failure and prognosis will be extracted. We will assess risk of bias in included studies using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool for prognostic studies and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. We expect heterogeneity and to conduct a qualitative synthesis of the results. If, however, heterogeneity is low, we will conduct a random effects meta-analysis stratified by basic study design.

DISCUSSION

This review will summarize and analyze studies of prevalence and prognosis of acutely ill patients, with organ failure at arrival to hospital, assist ED physicians assessing the risk of organ failure in unselected patients, and guide recommendations for further research.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42017060871.

Initial disease severity and quality of care of emergency department sepsis patients who are older or younger than 70 years of age

Objective

Due to atypical symptom presentation older patients are more prone to delayed sepsis recognition. We investigated whether initial disease severity before emergency department (ED) treatment (including treatable acute organ dysfunction), quality of ED sepsis care and the impact on mortality was different between patients older and younger than 70 years. If differences exist, improvements are needed for ED management of older patients at risk for sepsis.

Methods

In this observational multicenter study, ED patients who were hospitalized with a suspected infection were stratified by age <70 and ≥70 years. The presence of treatable and potentially reversible acute organ dysfunction was measured by the RO components of the Predisposition, Infection, Response and Organ dysfunction (PIRO) score, reflecting acute sepsis-related organ dysfunction developed before ED presentation. Quality of care, as assessed by the full compliance with nine quality performance measures and the standardized mortality ratio (SMR: observed/expected in-hospital mortality), was compared between older and younger patients.

Results

The RO-components of the PIRO score were 8 (interquartile range; 4–9) in the 833 older patients, twice as high as the 4 (2–8; P<0.001) in the 1537 younger patients. However, full compliance with all nine quality performance measures was achieved in 34.2 (31.0–37.4)% of the older patients, not higher than the 33.0 (30.7–35.4)% in younger patients (P = 0.640). In-hospital mortality was 9.2% (95%-CI, 7.3–11.2) in patients ≥70, twice as high as the 4.6% (3.6–5.6) in patients <70 years, resulting in an SMR (in study period) of ~0.7 in both groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Older sepsis patients are sicker at ED presentation but are not treated more expediently or reliably despite their extra acuity The presence of twice as much treatable acute organ dysfunction before ED treatment suggests that acute organ dysfunction is recognized relatively late by general practitioners or patients in the out of hospital setting.

The most commonly used disease severity scores are inappropriate for risk stratification of older emergency department sepsis patients: an observational multi-centre study

Background

Sepsis recognition in older emergency department (ED) patients is difficult due to atypical symptom presentation. We therefore investigated whether the prognostic and discriminative performance of the five most commonly used disease severity scores were appropriate for risk stratification of older ED sepsis patients (≥70 years) compared to a younger control group (<70 years).

Methods

This was an observational multi-centre study using an existing database in which ED patients who were hospitalized with a suspected infection were prospectively included. Patients were stratified by age < 70 and ≥70 years. We assessed the association with in-hospital mortality (primary outcome) and the area under the curve (AUC) with receiver operator characteristics of the Predisposition, Infection, Response, Organ dysfunction (PIRO), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), Mortality in ED Sepsis (MEDS), and the Modified and National Early Warning (MEWS and NEWS) scores.

Results

In-hospital mortality was 9.5% ((95%-CI); 7.4–11.5) in the 783 included older patients, and 4.6% (3.6–5.7) in the 1497 included younger patients. In contrast to younger patients, disease severity scores in older patients associated poorly with mortality. The AUCs of all disease severity scores were poor and ranged from 0.56 to 0.64 in older patients, significantly lower than the good AUC range from 0.72 to 0.86 in younger patients. The MEDS had the best AUC (0.64 (0.57–0.71)) in older patients. In older and younger patients, the newly proposed qSOFA score (Sepsis 3.0) had a lower AUC than the PIRO score (sepsis 2.0).

Conclusion

The prognostic and discriminative performance of the five most commonly used disease severity scores was poor and less useful for risk stratification of older ED sepsis patients.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13049-017-0436-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Sepsis guidelines: Clinical practice implications

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign 2012 Guidelines offer recommendations for the care of severely septic patients. These guidelines are appraised and summarized briefly in this article, and a case example illustrates the integration process. These guidelines are important for multidisciplinary team members working together toward the common goal of reducing sepsis mortality.

Quality improvement in pediatric sepsis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although there is abundant literature detailing the impact of quality improvement in adult sepsis, the pediatric literature is lacking. Despite consensus definitions for sepsis, which patients along the sepsis spectrum should receive aggressive management and the exact onset of sepsis ('time zero') are not clearly established. In the adult emergency department (ED), sepsis onset is defined as the time of entry into the ED; however, this definition cannot be applied to hospitalized patients or patients who evolve during their ED course. Since the time of sepsis onset will dictate the timeliness of subsequent process measures, the variable definitions in the literature make it difficult to generalize findings among prior studies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite the variation in defining time zero, aggressive fluid administration, timely antibiotics, and compliance with sepsis bundles have been shown to improve mortality and to reduce hospital and intensive care length of stay. In addition, early identification tools show promise in beginning to define sepsis onset and retrospective search tools may allow improved case finding of those children of concern for sepsis.

SUMMARY

Quality improvement in pediatric sepsis is evolving. As we continue to define quality measures, we must standardize the definition of sepsis onset. This definition should be applicable to any treatment venue to ensure measures can be evaluated across all settings. In addition, we must delineate which patients along the sepsis spectrum should be candidates for timely interventions and standardize other outcome measures beyond mortality.

Identification of the severe sepsis patient at triage: a prospective analysis of the Australasian Triage Scale

Objective

This study aims to investigate the accuracy and validity of the Australasian Triage Scale (ATS) as a tool to identify and manage in a timely manner the deteriorating patient with severe sepsis.

Methods

This was a prospective observational study conducted in five sites of adult patients. Keywords and physiological vital signs data from triage documentation were analysed for the ‘identified’ status compared with confirmed diagnosis of severe sepsis after admission to the intensive care unit. The primary outcome is the accuracy and validity of the ATS Triage scale categories to identify a prespecified severe sepsis population at triage. Secondary outcome measures included time compliance, antimicrobial administration and mortality prediction. Statistical analysis included parameters of diagnostic performance. Adjusted multivariate logistic regression analysis was applied to mortality prediction.

Results

Of 1022 patients meeting the criteria for severe sepsis, 995 were triaged through the emergency department, 164 with shock. Only 53% (n=534) were identified at triage. The overall sensitivity of the ATS to identify severe sepsis was 71%. ATS 3 was the most accurate (likelihood ratio positive, 2.45, positive predictive value 0.73) and ATS 2 the most valid (area under the curve 0.567) category. Identified cases were more likely to survive (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.697 to 0.94, p<0.007). The strongest bias-adjusted predictors of mortality were circulatory compromise variable (1.78, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.41, p<0.001), lactate >4 (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.89, p<0.001) and ATS 1 category (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.35, p<0.005).

Conclusions

The ATS and its categories is a sensitive and moderately accurate and valid tool for identifying severe sepsis in a predetermined group, but lacks clinical efficacy and safety without further education or quality improvement strategies targeted to the identification of severe sepsis.

Predictors of unattempted central venous catheterization in septic patients eligible for early goal-directed therapy

INTRODUCTION

Central venous catheterization (CVC) can be an important component of the management of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. CVC, however, is a time- and resource-intensive procedure associated with serious complications. The effects of the absence of shock or the presence of relative contraindications on undertaking central line placement in septic emergency department (ED) patients eligible for early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) have not been well described. We sought to determine the association of relative normotension (sustained systolic blood pressure >90 mmHg independent of or in response to an initial crystalloid resuscitation of 20 mL/kg), obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥30), moderate thrombocytopenia (platelet count <50,000 per μL), and coagulopathy (international normalized ratio ≥2.0) with unattempted CVC in EGDT-eligible patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of 421 adults who met EGDT criteria in 5 community EDs over a period of 13 months. We compared patients with attempted thoracic (internal jugular or subclavian) CVC with those who did not undergo an attempted thoracic line. We also compared patients with any attempted CVC (either thoracic or femoral) with those who did not undergo any attempted central line. We used multivariate logistic regression analysis to calculate adjusted odd ratios (AORs).

RESULTS

In our study, 364 (86.5%) patients underwent attempted thoracic CVC and 57 (13.5%) did not. Relative normotension was significantly associated with unattempted thoracic CVC (AOR 2.6 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-4.3), as were moderate thrombocytopenia (AOR 3.9; 95% CI, 1.5-10.1) and coagulopathy (AOR 2.7; 95% CI, 1.3-5.6). When assessing for attempted catheterization of any central venous site (thoracic or femoral), 382 (90.7%) patients underwent attempted catheterization and 39 (9.3%) patients did not. Relative normotension (AOR 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2-4.5) and moderate thrombocytopenia (AOR 3.9; 95% CI, 1.5-10.3) were significantly associated with unattempted CVC, whereas coagulopathy was not (AOR 0.6; 95% CI, 0.2-1.8). Obesity was not significantly associated with unattempted CVC, either thoracic in location or at any site.

CONCLUSION

Septic patients eligible for EGDT with relative normotension and those with moderate thrombocytopenia were less likely to undergo attempted CVC at any site. Those with coagulopathy were also less likely to undergo attempted thoracic central line placement. Knowledge of the decision-making calculus at play for physicians considering central venous catheterization in this population can help inform physician education and performance improvement programs.