PURPOSE: Fast diagnosis and initiation of appropriate antibiotic therapy is pivotal for the survival of sepsis patients. However, most studies on suspected sepsis patients are conducted in the intensive care unit or in the emergency room setting, neglecting the standard care setting. This study evaluated sepsis risk factors, microbiological accurateness of the initial empiric antimicrobial therapy and its effect on hospital mortality in standard care patients. METHODS: In this prospective observational cohort study, patients with clinically suspected sepsis meeting two or more SIRS criteria were screened on standard care wards. After hospital discharge, occurrence of an infection was assessed according to standardized criteria, and empirical antibiotic therapy was evaluated using antibiograms of recognized pathogens by expert review. RESULTS: Of the 2384 screened patients, 298 fulfilled two or more SIRS criteria. Among these were 28.2 % SIRS patients without infection, 46.3 % non-bacteremic/fungemic sepsis patients and 25.5 % bacteremic/fungemic sepsis patients. Occurrence of a malignant disease and chills were associated with a higher risk of patients having bacteremic/fungemic sepsis, whereas other described risk factors remained insignificant. In total, 91.1 % of suspected sepsis patients received empirical antimicrobial therapy, but 41.1 % of bacteremic sepsis patients received inappropriate therapy. Non-surviving bacteremic sepsis patients received a higher proportion of inappropriate therapy than those who survived (p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of bacteremic sepsis patients receive inappropriate empiric antimicrobial therapy. Our results indicate that rapid availability of microbiological results is vital, since inappropriate antimicrobial therapy tended to increase the hospital mortality of sepsis patients.
PURPOSE: Fast diagnosis and initiation of appropriate antibiotic therapy is pivotal for the survival of sepsispatients. However, most studies on suspected sepsispatients are conducted in the intensive care unit or in the emergency room setting, neglecting the standard care setting. This study evaluated sepsis risk factors, microbiological accurateness of the initial empiric antimicrobial therapy and its effect on hospital mortality in standard care patients. METHODS: In this prospective observational cohort study, patients with clinically suspected sepsis meeting two or more SIRS criteria were screened on standard care wards. After hospital discharge, occurrence of an infection was assessed according to standardized criteria, and empirical antibiotic therapy was evaluated using antibiograms of recognized pathogens by expert review. RESULTS: Of the 2384 screened patients, 298 fulfilled two or more SIRS criteria. Among these were 28.2 % SIRS patients without infection, 46.3 % non-bacteremic/fungemic sepsispatients and 25.5 % bacteremic/fungemic sepsispatients. Occurrence of a malignant disease and chills were associated with a higher risk of patients having bacteremic/fungemic sepsis, whereas other described risk factors remained insignificant. In total, 91.1 % of suspected sepsispatients received empirical antimicrobial therapy, but 41.1 % of bacteremic sepsispatients received inappropriate therapy. Non-surviving bacteremic sepsispatients received a higher proportion of inappropriate therapy than those who survived (p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of bacteremic sepsispatients receive inappropriate empiric antimicrobial therapy. Our results indicate that rapid availability of microbiological results is vital, since inappropriate antimicrobial therapy tended to increase the hospital mortality of sepsispatients.
Authors: Lisa R Stoneking; Asad E Patanwala; John P Winkler; Albert B Fiorello; Elizabeth S Lee; Daniel P Olson; Donna M Wolk Journal: J Emerg Med Date: 2012-05-16 Impact factor: 1.484
Authors: Wilbert T Jellema; D Peter Veerman; Robbert J De Winter; Karel H Wesseling; Sander J H Van Deventer; C Erik Hack; Johannes J van Lieshout Journal: J Lab Clin Med Date: 2002-10
Authors: Anthony Mato; Barry D Fuchs; Daniel F Heitjan; Rosemarie Mick; Scott D Halpern; Payal D Shah; Samamtha Jacobs; Erin M Olson; Stephen J Schuster; Chaitra Ujjani; Elise A Chong; Alison W Loren; Andrea N Miltiades; Selina Luger Journal: Cancer Biol Ther Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 4.742
Authors: C De la Calle; L Morata; N Cobos-Trigueros; J A Martinez; C Cardozo; J Mensa; A Soriano Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2016-01-15 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Franz Ratzinger; Helmuth Haslacher; Markus Stadlberger; Ralf L J Schmidt; Markus Obermüller; Klaus G Schmetterer; Thomas Perkmann; Athanasios Makristathis; Rodrig Marculescu; Heinz Burgmann Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Nicolò Capsoni; Pietro Bellone; Stefano Aliberti; Giovanni Sotgiu; Donatella Pavanello; Benedetto Visintin; Elena Callisto; Laura Saderi; Davide Soldini; Luca Lardera; Valter Monzani; Anna Maria Brambilla Journal: Multidiscip Respir Med Date: 2019-07-05