Craig A Umscheid1, Joel Betesh, Christine VanZandbergen, Asaf Hanish, Gordon Tait, Mark E Mikkelsen, Benjamin French, Barry D Fuchs. 1. Center for Evidence-based Practice, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Institute for Translational Medicine and Therapeutics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early recognition and timely intervention significantly reduce sepsis-related mortality. OBJECTIVE: Describe the development, implementation, and impact of an early warning and response system (EWRS) for sepsis. DESIGN: After tool derivation and validation, a preimplementation/postimplementation study with multivariable adjustment measured impact. SETTING: Urban academic healthcare system. PATIENTS: Adult non-ICU patients admitted to acute inpatient units from October 1, 2011 to October 31, 2011 for tool derivation, June 6, 2012 to July 5, 2012 for tool validation, and June 6, 2012 to September 4, 2012 and June 6, 2013 to September 4, 2013 for the preimplementation/postimplementation analysis. INTERVENTION: An EWRS in our electronic health record monitored laboratory values and vital signs in real time. If a patient had ≥4 predefined abnormalities at any single time, the provider, nurse, and rapid response coordinator were notified and performed an immediate bedside patient evaluation. MEASUREMENTS: Screen positive rates, test characteristics, predictive values, and likelihood ratios; system utilization; and resulting changes in processes and outcomes. RESULTS: The tool's screen positive, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values and likelihood ratios for our composite of intensive care unit (ICU) transfer, rapid response team call, or death in the derivation cohort was 6%, 16%, 97%, 26%, 94%, 5.3, and 0.9, respectively. Validation values were similar. The EWRS resulted in a statistically significant increase in early sepsis care, ICU transfer, and sepsis documentation, and decreased sepsis mortality and increased discharge to home, although neither of these latter 2 findings reached statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: An automated prediction tool identified at-risk patients and prompted a bedside evaluation resulting in more timely sepsis care, improved documentation, and a suggestion of reduced mortality.
BACKGROUND: Early recognition and timely intervention significantly reduce sepsis-related mortality. OBJECTIVE: Describe the development, implementation, and impact of an early warning and response system (EWRS) for sepsis. DESIGN: After tool derivation and validation, a preimplementation/postimplementation study with multivariable adjustment measured impact. SETTING: Urban academic healthcare system. PATIENTS: Adult non-ICU patients admitted to acute inpatient units from October 1, 2011 to October 31, 2011 for tool derivation, June 6, 2012 to July 5, 2012 for tool validation, and June 6, 2012 to September 4, 2012 and June 6, 2013 to September 4, 2013 for the preimplementation/postimplementation analysis. INTERVENTION: An EWRS in our electronic health record monitored laboratory values and vital signs in real time. If a patient had ≥4 predefined abnormalities at any single time, the provider, nurse, and rapid response coordinator were notified and performed an immediate bedside patient evaluation. MEASUREMENTS: Screen positive rates, test characteristics, predictive values, and likelihood ratios; system utilization; and resulting changes in processes and outcomes. RESULTS: The tool's screen positive, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values and likelihood ratios for our composite of intensive care unit (ICU) transfer, rapid response team call, or death in the derivation cohort was 6%, 16%, 97%, 26%, 94%, 5.3, and 0.9, respectively. Validation values were similar. The EWRS resulted in a statistically significant increase in early sepsis care, ICU transfer, and sepsis documentation, and decreased sepsis mortality and increased discharge to home, although neither of these latter 2 findings reached statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: An automated prediction tool identified at-risk patients and prompted a bedside evaluation resulting in more timely sepsis care, improved documentation, and a suggestion of reduced mortality.
Authors: E Rivers; B Nguyen; S Havstad; J Ressler; A Muzzin; B Knoblich; E Peterson; M Tomlanovich Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-11-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mitchell M Levy; R Phillip Dellinger; Sean R Townsend; Walter T Linde-Zwirble; John C Marshall; Julian Bion; Christa Schorr; Antonio Artigas; Graham Ramsay; Richard Beale; Margaret M Parker; Herwig Gerlach; Konrad Reinhart; Eliezer Silva; Maurene Harvey; Susan Regan; Derek C Angus Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Steve Jones; Miki Mullally; Sarah Ingleby; Michael Buist; Michael Bailey; Jane M Eddleston Journal: Crit Care Resusc Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 2.159
Authors: Amber M Sawyer; Eli N Deal; Andrew J Labelle; Chad Witt; Steven W Thiel; Kevin Heard; Richard M Reichley; Scott T Micek; Marin H Kollef Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Thomas C Bailey; Yixin Chen; Yi Mao; Chenyang Lu; Gregory Hackmann; Scott T Micek; Kevin M Heard; Kelly M Faulkner; Marin H Kollef Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2013-02-25 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: R Phillip Dellinger; Mitchell M Levy; Andrew Rhodes; Djillali Annane; Herwig Gerlach; Steven M Opal; Jonathan E Sevransky; Charles L Sprung; Ivor S Douglas; Roman Jaeschke; Tiffany M Osborn; Mark E Nunnally; Sean R Townsend; Konrad Reinhart; Ruth M Kleinpell; Derek C Angus; Clifford S Deutschman; Flavia R Machado; Gordon D Rubenfeld; Steven A Webb; Richard J Beale; Jean-Louis Vincent; Rui Moreno Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Lucienne T Q Cardoso; Cintia M C Grion; Tiemi Matsuo; Elza H T Anami; Ivanil A M Kauss; Ludmila Seko; Ana M Bonametti Journal: Crit Care Date: 2011-01-18 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Joshua Rolnick; N Lance Downing; John Shepard; Weihan Chu; Julia Tam; Alexander Wessels; Ron Li; Brian Dietrich; Michael Rudy; Leon Castaneda; Lisa Shieh Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2016-06-22 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Jennifer C Ginestra; Heather M Giannini; William D Schweickert; Laurie Meadows; Michael J Lynch; Kimberly Pavan; Corey J Chivers; Michael Draugelis; Patrick J Donnelly; Barry D Fuchs; Craig A Umscheid Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2019-11 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Zhongheng Zhang; Nathan J Smischney; Haibo Zhang; Sven Van Poucke; Panagiotis Tsirigotis; Jordi Rello; Patrick M Honore; Win Sen Kuan; Juliet June Ray; Jiancang Zhou; You Shang; Yuetian Yu; Christian Jung; Chiara Robba; Fabio Silvio Taccone; Pietro Caironi; David Grimaldi; Stefan Hofer; George Dimopoulos; Marc Leone; Sang-Bum Hong; Mabrouk Bahloul; Laurent Argaud; Won Young Kim; Herbert D Spapen; Jose Rodolfo Rocco Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Zhongheng Zhang; Yucai Hong; Nathan J Smischney; Han-Pin Kuo; Panagiotis Tsirigotis; Jordi Rello; Win Sen Kuan; Christian Jung; Chiara Robba; Fabio Silvio Taccone; Marc Leone; Herbert Spapen; David Grimaldi; Sven Van Poucke; Steven Q Simpson; Patrick M Honore; Stefan Hofer; Pietro Caironi Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Edward Goldstein; Derek R MacFadden; Zeynal Karaca; Claudia A Steiner; Cecile Viboud; Marc Lipsitch Journal: Int J Antimicrob Agents Date: 2019-03-06 Impact factor: 5.283
Authors: Geoffrey E Hayden; Rachel E Tuuri; Rachel Scott; Joseph D Losek; Aaron M Blackshaw; Andrew J Schoenling; Paul J Nietert; Greg A Hall Journal: Am J Emerg Med Date: 2015-08-28 Impact factor: 2.469