Impact of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign protocols on hospital length of stay and mortality in septic shock patients: Results of a three-year follow-up quasi-experimental study*

Castellanos-Ortega, Álvaro; Suberviola, Borja; García-Astudillo, Luis A.; Peña, M.S. Holanda; Ortiz, Fernando Rosell; Llorca, Javier; Delgado-Rodrı́guez, Miguel

doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e3181d455b6

Cited by 330 publications

(216 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

188

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Given the evidence supporting early interventions, such findings emphasise the role of clinical audit as a means of improving adherence to guidelines. At the local level, it is possible for each maternity unit to review performance towards meetings these goals, and quality improvement programmes have been successful in reducing time to first antibiotic21 and mortality from sepsis 37…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Progression from severe sepsis in pregnancy to death: a UK population‐based case‐control analysis

Mohamed-Ahmed

Nair

Acosta

et al. 2015

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo identify factors associated with progression from pregnancy‐associated severe sepsis to death in the UK.DesignA population‐based case‐control analysis using data from the UK Obstetric Surveillance System (UKOSS) and the UK Confidential Enquiry into Maternal Death (CEMD).SettingAll pregnancy care and death settings in UK hospitals.PopulationAll non‐influenza sepsis‐related maternal deaths (January 2009 to December 2012) were included as cases (n = 43), and all women who survived severe non‐influenza sepsis in pregnancy (June 2011 to May 2012) were included as controls (n = 358).MethodsCases and controls were identified using the CEMD and UKOSS. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals.Main outcome measuresOdds ratios for socio‐demographic, medical, obstetric and management factors in women who died from sepsis, compared with those who survived.ResultsFour factors were included in the final regression model. Women who died were more likely to have never received antibiotics [aOR = 22.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.64–141.6], to have medical comorbidities (aOR = 2.53, 95%CI 1.23–5.23) and to be multiparous (aOR = 3.57, 95%CI 1.62–7.89). Anaemia (aOR = 13.5, 95%CI 3.17–57.6) and immunosuppression (aOR = 15.0, 95%CI 1.93–116.9) were the two most important factors driving the association between medical comorbidities and progression to death.ConclusionsThere must be continued vigilance for the risks of infection in pregnant women with medical comorbidities. Improved adherence to national guidelines, alongside prompt recognition and treatment with antibiotics, may reduce the burden from sepsis‐related maternal deaths.Tweetable abstractMedical comorbidities, multiparity and antibiotic delays increase the risk of death from maternal sepsis.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Progression from severe sepsis in pregnancy to death: a UK population‐based case‐control analysis

Mohamed-Ahmed

Nair

Acosta

et al. 2015

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This being a pilot study, we did not have any preliminary data regarding adherence to sepsis guidelines in overflow ICUs to calculate appropriate sample size. However, in 2 recent studies of dedicated ICUs (Ferrer et al 13 and Castellanos-Ortega et al 14 ), the averaged adherence to a single measure like checking of lactate level was 27% preintervention and 62% post-intervention. With alpha level 0.05 and 80% power, one would need 31 patients in each unit to detect such differences with respect to this intervention.…”

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Does sepsis treatment differ between primary and overflow intensive care units?

Vishnupriya

Falade

Workneh

et al. 2012

Journal of Hospital Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND:Sepsis is a major cause of death in hospitalized patients. Early goal‐directed therapy is the standard of care. When primary intensive care units (ICUs) are full, sepsis patients are cared for in overflow ICUs.OBJECTIVE:To determine if process‐of‐care measures in the care of sepsis patients differed between primary and overflow ICUs at our institution.DESIGN:We conducted a retrospective study of all adult patients admitted with sepsis between July 2009 and February 2010 to either the primary ICU or the overflow ICU.MEASUREMENTS:Baseline patient characteristics and multiple process‐of‐care measures, including diagnostic and therapeutic interventions.RESULTS:There were 141 patients admitted with sepsis to our hospital; 100 were cared for in the primary ICU and 41 in the overflow ICU. Baseline acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) scores were similar. Patients received similar processes‐of‐care in the primary ICU and overflow ICU with the exception of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and gastrointestinal (GI) prophylaxis within 24 hours of admission, which were better adhered to in the primary ICU (74% vs 49%, P = 0.004, and 68% vs 44%, P = 0.012, respectively). There were no significant differences in hospital and ICU length of stay between the 2 units (9.68 days vs 9.73 days, P = 0.98, and 4.78 days vs 4.92 days, P = 0.97, respectively).CONCLUSIONS:Patients with sepsis admitted to the primary ICU and overflow ICU at our institution were managed similarly. Overflowing sepsis patients to non‐primary intensive care units may not affect guideline‐concordant care delivery or length of stay. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2012; © 2012 Society of Hospital Medicine

show abstract

“…If an infectious cause of fever is suspected, empirical antimicrobial therapy is urgent. Indeed, delaying effective antimicrobial therapy has been associated with increased mortality [49,[110][111][112][113][114]. Barie and associates [115] demonstrated in a prospective observational study that the delayed-antibiotic therapy increased the risk of death by 2.1% for every 30 minutes' delay (OR, 1.021; 95% CI, 1.003 to 1.038).…”

Section: For Healthcare-associated Infections Non-responsive Tomentioning

confidence: 99%

Sepsis in head and neck cancer patients treated with chemotherapy and radiation: Literature review and consensus

Mirabile

Numico²,

Russi

et al. 2015

Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The reporting of infection/sepsis in chemo/radiation-treated head and neck cancer patients is sparse and the problem is underestimated. A multidisciplinary group of head and neck cancer specialists from Italy met with the aim of reaching a consensus on a clinical definition and management of infections and sepsis. The Delphi appropriateness method was used for this consensus. External expert reviewers then evaluated the conclusions carefully according to their area of expertise. The paper contains seven clusters of statements about the clinical definition and management of infections and sepsis in head and neck cancer patients, which had a consensus. Furthermore, it offers a review of recent literature in these topics

show abstract

Impact of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign protocols on hospital length of stay and mortality in septic shock patients: Results of a three-year follow-up quasi-experimental study*

Cited by 330 publications

References 28 publications

Progression from severe sepsis in pregnancy to death: a UK population‐based case‐control analysis

Progression from severe sepsis in pregnancy to death: a UK population‐based case‐control analysis

Does sepsis treatment differ between primary and overflow intensive care units?

Sepsis in head and neck cancer patients treated with chemotherapy and radiation: Literature review and consensus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About