Our aim was to prospectively determine the predictive capabilities of SEPSIS-1 and SEPSIS-3 definitions in the emergency departments and general wards. Patients with National Early Warning Score (NEWS) of 3 or above and suspected or proven infection were enrolled over a 24-h period in 13 Welsh hospitals. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 30 days. Out of the 5422 patients screened, 431 fulfilled inclusion criteria and 380 (88%) were recruited. Using the SEPSIS-1 definition, 212 patients had sepsis. When using the SEPSIS-3 definitions with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score ≥ 2, there were 272 septic patients, whereas with quickSOFA score ≥ 2, 50 patients were identified. For the prediction of primary outcome, SEPSIS-1 criteria had a sensitivity (95%CI) of 65% (54-75%) and specificity of 47% (41-53%); SEPSIS-3 criteria had a sensitivity of 86% (76-92%) and specificity of 32% (27-38%). SEPSIS-3 and SEPSIS-1 definitions were associated with a hazard ratio (95%CI) 2.7 (1.5-5.6) and 1.6 (1.3-2.5), respectively. Scoring system discrimination evaluated by receiver operating characteristic curves was highest for Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (0.69 (95%CI 0.63-0.76)), followed by NEWS (0.58 (0.51-0.66)) (p < 0.001). Systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria (0.55 (0.49-0.61)) and quickSOFA score (0.56 (0.49-0.64)) could not predict outcome. The SEPSIS-3 definition identified patients with the highest risk. Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score and NEWS were better predictors of poor outcome. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score appeared to be the best tool for identifying patients with high risk of death and sepsis-induced organ dysfunction.

The importance of emotions within medical practice is well documented. Research suggests that how clinicians deal with negative emotions can affect clinical decision-making, health service delivery, clinician well-being, attentiveness to patient care and patient satisfaction. Previous research has identified the transition from student to junior doctor (intern) as a particularly challenging time. While many studies have highlighted the presence of emotions during this transition, how junior doctors manage emotions has rarely been considered. We conducted a secondary analysis of narrative data in which 34 junior doctors, within a few months of transitioning into practice, talked about situations for which they felt prepared or unprepared for practice (preparedness narratives) through audio diaries and interviews. We examined these data deductively (using Gross’ theory of emotion regulation: ER) and inductively to answer the following research questions: (RQ1) what ER strategies do junior doctors describe in their preparedness narratives? and (RQ2) at what point in the clinical situation are these strategies narrated? We identified 406 personal incident narratives: 243 (60%) contained negative emotion, with 86 (21%) also containing ER. Overall, we identified 137 ER strategies, occurring prior to (n = 29, 21%), during (n = 74, 54%) and after (n = 34, 25%) the situation. Although Gross’ theory captured many of the ER strategies used by junior doctors, we identify further ways in which this model can be adapted to fully capture the range of ER strategies participants employed. Further, from our analysis, we believe that raising medical students’ awareness of how they can handle stressful situations might help smooth the transition to becoming a doctor and be important for later practice.

Data on sepsis prevalence on the general wards is lacking on the UK and in the developed world. We conducted a multicentre, prospective, observational study of the prevalence of patients with sepsis or severe sepsis on the general wards and Emergency Departments (ED) in Wales. During the 24-hour study period all patients with NEWS≥3 were screened for presence of 2 or more SIRS criteria. To be eligible for inclusion, patients had to have a high clinical suspicion of an infection, together with a systemic inflammatory response (sepsis) and evidence of acute organ dysfunction and/or shock (severe sepsis). There were 5317 in-patients in the 24-hour study period. Data were returned on 1198 digital data collection forms on patients with NEWS≥3 of which 87 were removed, leaving 1111 for analysis. 146 patients had sepsis and 144 patients had severe sepsis. Combined prevalence of sepsis and severe sepsis was 5.5% amongst all in-patients. Patients with sepsis had significantly higher NEWS scores (3 IQR 3–4 for non-sepsis and 4 IQR 3–6 for sepsis patients, respectively). Common organ dysfunctions in severe sepsis were hypoxia (47%), hypoperfusion (40%) and acute kidney injury (25%). Mortality at 90 days was 31% with a median (IQR) hospital free stay of 78 (36–85) days. Screening for sepsis, referral to Critical Care and completion of Sepsis 6 bundle was low: 26%, 16% and 12% in the sepsis group. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified higher National Early Warning Score, diabetes, COPD, heart failure, malignancy and current or previous smoking habits as independent variables suggesting the diagnosis of sepsis. We observed that sepsis is more prevalent in the general ward and ED than previously suggested before and that screening and effective treatment for sepsis and severe sepsis is far from being operationalized in this environment, leading to high 90 days mortality.

Our platform allowed us to measure, for the first time, the prevalence of sepsis in Wales over 24 hours.

Background: Central venous catheters are inserted ubiquitously in critical care and have roles in drug administration, fluid management and renal replacement therapy. They are also associated with numerous complications. The true number of central venous catheters inserted per year and the proportion of them associated with complications are unknown in the UK. Methods: We performed a prospective audit at five hospitals, as a feasibility pilot for a larger, nationwide audit. Using a novel secure online data collection platform, developed earlier and adapted for this project, all central venous catheters inserted for patients admitted to the Intensive Care Units were documented at five pilot sites across the UK. Results: A total of 117 data collection forms were submitted. Users found the electronic data collection system easy to use. All data fields were ready for analysis immediately after data input. Out of the 117 central venous catheters, 17 were haemodialysis catheters and five pulmonary artery introducers. Experienced practitioners (at least three years' experience) inserted 85% of the central venous catheters. The site of insertion was the internal jugular vein for 80%, femoral for 12% and subclavian for 8% of central venous catheters. Most central venous catheters were inserted in ICU (49%) or theatres (42%). Ultrasound was used for 109 (93%) of central venous catheter insertions and its use was not associated with fewer complications. In 15 cases venopuncture was attempted more than once (all with ultrasound) and this was associated with significantly increased risk of complications. There were eight immediate complications (6.8%): five related to venopuncture and inability to pass a guidewire, two carotid artery punctures and one associated with significant arrhythmia. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the ease and feasibility of collecting detailed descriptive data on central line insertion and its immediate complications in the UK over two weeks. In our proposed nationwide audit, organisation-level data on local policies and standard operating procedures is required to complete the picture on this important aspect of intensive care practice.