The impact of a multifaceted intervention including sepsis electronic alert system and sepsis response team on the outcomes of patients with sepsis and septic shock

Abstract

BackgroundCompliance with the clinical practice guidelines of sepsis management has been low. The objective of our study was to describe the results of implementing a multifaceted intervention including an electronic alert (e-alert) with a sepsis response team (SRT) on the outcome of patients with sepsis and septic shock presenting to the emergency department.MethodsThis was a pre–post two-phased implementation study that consisted of a pre-intervention phase (January 01, 2011–September 24, 2012), intervention phase I (multifaceted intervention including e-alert, from September 25, 2012–March 03, 2013) and intervention phase II when SRT was added (March 04, 2013–October 30, 2013) in a 900-bed tertiary-care academic hospital. We recorded baseline characteristics and processes of care in adult patients presenting with sepsis or septic shock. The primary outcome measures were hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were the need for mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the intensive unit and in the hospital.ResultsAfter implementing the multifaceted intervention including e-alert and SRT, cases were identified with less severe clinical and laboratory abnormalities and the processes of care improved. When adjusted to propensity score, the interventions were associated with reduction in hospital mortality [for intervention phase II compared to pre-intervention: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.71, 95% CI 0.58–0.85, p = 0.003], reduction in the need for mechanical ventilation (aOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.37–0.55, p < 0.0001) and reduction in ICU LOS and hospital LOS for all patients as well as ICU LOS for survivors.ConclusionsImplementing a multifaceted intervention including sepsis e-alert with SRT was associated with earlier identification of sepsis, increase in compliance with sepsis resuscitation bundle and reduction in the need for mechanical ventilation and reduction in hospital mortality and LOS.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13613-017-0280-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Opioid Prescribing After Curative-Intent Surgery: A Qualitative Study Using the Theoretical Domains Framework

“…Although no studies have reported implementing these types of interventions to reduce opioid prescribing for patients with cancer, both Enablement and Environmental restructuring interventions have been used to improve compliance with evidence-based guidelines for managing sepsis. 40,41 These interventions are particularly well-suited for surgical patients with cancer. For example, patients with cancer report high levels of psychological distress, 10,11 and surgeons in our study reported difficulty adequately counseling patients on safe opioid use because patients are distracted by coping with a new cancer diagnosis.…”

Modified early warning score-based clinical decision support: cost impact and clinical outcomes in sepsis

“… 12 , 13 The use of early warning scores has been shown to predict in-hospital mortality and, when paired with a trigger to a provider, can lead to improved sepsis care. 12 , 14 Given the significant costs associated with sepsis patients, we assessed the clinical and financial impact of implementing an EHR-based, modified Early Warning Score (mEWS) alerting system for decompensating septic patients in an academic medical center (Appendix Figure 1 and Section 2). We hypothesized that earlier recognition of new sepsis or decompensating septic patients on the floor may improve clinical and financial outcomes.…”

Integrating a Machine Learning System Into Clinical Workflows: Qualitative Study

“…Clinical decision support (CDS) systems may play a role in improving bundle compliance and delivery of timely treatment. CDS sepsis early warning systems leverage electronic health information to continuously stratify patients for the risk of sepsis and alert clinicians [ 17 - 22 ]. Unfortunately, many sepsis CDS systems fail to improve outcomes because of poor diagnostic accuracy and program implementation [ 23 - 25 ].…”