What Do We Know about Early Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock in Polish Hospitals? A Questionnaire Study

Abstract

Background: Sepsis and septic shock are medical emergencies with a high risk of poor prognosis. We investigate the correspondence between Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines and clinical practice in Poland, with special attention given to differences between ICU and non-ICU environments as well as regional variations within the country. Methods: A web-based questionnaire study was performed on a random sample of 60 hospitals from the three most populated regions in Poland—Masovia, Silesia, and Greater Poland. A 19-item questionnaire was built based on the most recent edition of SSC guidelines. Results: Sepsis diagnosis was primarily based on clinical evaluation (ICUs: 94%, non-ICUs: 62%; p = 0.02). There were significant differences between ICUs and non-ICUs regarding taking blood cultures for pathogen identification (2-times more frequent in ICUs) and having hospital-based operating procedures to adjust antimicrobial treatment to a clinical scenario (a difference of 17%). Modification of empiric antimicrobial treatment was required post-ICU admission in 70% of cases. ICUs differed from non-ICUs with regard to the methods of fluid responsiveness assessment and the types of catecholamines and fluids used to treat septic shock. The mean fluid load applied before the implementation of catecholamines was 25.8 ± 10.6 mL/kg. Norepinephrine was the first-line agent used to treat shock, and balanced crystalloids were preferred in both ICUs and non-ICUs. Conclusion: Compliance with SCC guidelines in Polish hospitals is insufficient, especially outside ICUs. There is a need for education among healthcare professionals to reach at least an acceptable level of knowledge and attitude in this field.

Knowledge, attitudes and practices towards the diagnosis and management of paediatric sepsis among paediatric physicians and nurses: a cross-sectional study of 21 hospitals in Hubei Province, China

“…Studies Open access in non-paediatric settings have reported moderate-togood levels of practice, 18 although suboptimal practices have been identified regarding the measurement of lactate levels, interval for antimicrobial therapy after a presumptive sepsis diagnosis, use of crystalloids for fluid resuscitation and indications for blood culture. 19 Additionally, there is evidence of insufficient compliance with sepsis guidelines in hospitals in Poland 22 and China. 23 The observed variance between moderate knowledge of sepsis and positive attitudes, alongside proficient practices, may stem from various factors.…”