Bonnie L Westra1, Sean Landman, Pranjul Yadav, Michael Steinbach. 1. Bonnie L. Westra, PhD, RN, FAAN, FACMI, University of Minnesota, School of Nursing, 308 Harvard St SE, WDH 5-140, Minneapolis, MN, USA 55455, Email: westr006@umn.edu.
Abstract
To conduct an independent secondary analysis of a multi-focal intervention for early detection of sepsis that included implementation of change management strategies, electronic surveillance for sepsis, and evidence based point of care alerting using the POC AdvisorTM application. METHODS: Propensity score matching was used to select subsets of the cohorts with balanced covariates. Bootstrapping was performed to build distributions of the measured difference in rates/means. The effect of the sepsis intervention was evaluated for all patients, and High and Low Risk subgroups for illness severity. A separate analysis was performed patients on the intervention and non-intervention units (without the electronic surveillance). Sensitivity, specificity, and the positive predictive values were calculated to evaluate the accuracy of the alerting system for detecting sepsis or severe sepsis/ septic shock. RESULTS: There was positive effect on the intervention units with sepsis electronic surveillance with an adjusted mortality rate of -6.6%. Mortality rates for non-intervention units also improved, but at a lower rate of -2.9%. Additional outcomes improved for patients on both intervention and non-intervention units for home discharge (7.5% vs 1.1%), total length of hospital stay (-0.9% vs -0.3%), and 30 day readmissions (-6.6% vs -1.6%). Patients on the intervention units showed better outcomes compared with non-intervention unit patients, and even more so for High Risk patients. The sensitivity was 95.2%, specificity of 82.0% and PPV of 50.6% for the electronic surveillance alerts. CONCLUSION: There was improvement over time across the hospital for patients on the intervention and non-intervention units with more improvement for sicker patients. Patients on intervention units with electronic surveillance have better outcomes; however, due to differences in exclusion criteria and types of units, further study is needed to draw a direct relationship between the electronic surveillance system and outcomes.
To conduct an independent secondary analysis of a multi-focal intervention for early detection of sepsis that included implementation of change management strategies, electronic surveillance for sepsis, and evidence based point of care alerting using the POC AdvisorTM application. METHODS: Propensity score matching was used to select subsets of the cohorts with balanced covariates. Bootstrapping was performed to build distributions of the measured difference in rates/means. The effect of the sepsis intervention was evaluated for all patients, and High and Low Risk subgroups for illness severity. A separate analysis was performed patients on the intervention and non-intervention units (without the electronic surveillance). Sensitivity, specificity, and the positive predictive values were calculated to evaluate the accuracy of the alerting system for detecting sepsis or severe sepsis/ septic shock. RESULTS: There was positive effect on the intervention units with sepsis electronic surveillance with an adjusted mortality rate of -6.6%. Mortality rates for non-intervention units also improved, but at a lower rate of -2.9%. Additional outcomes improved for patients on both intervention and non-intervention units for home discharge (7.5% vs 1.1%), total length of hospital stay (-0.9% vs -0.3%), and 30 day readmissions (-6.6% vs -1.6%). Patients on the intervention units showed better outcomes compared with non-intervention unit patients, and even more so for High Risk patients. The sensitivity was 95.2%, specificity of 82.0% and PPV of 50.6% for the electronic surveillance alerts. CONCLUSION: There was improvement over time across the hospital for patients on the intervention and non-intervention units with more improvement for sicker patients. Patients on intervention units with electronic surveillance have better outcomes; however, due to differences in exclusion criteria and types of units, further study is needed to draw a direct relationship between the electronic surveillance system and outcomes.
Authors: S T Normand; M B Landrum; E Guadagnoli; J Z Ayanian; T J Ryan; P D Cleary; B J McNeil Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Bruce A McKinley; Laura J Moore; Joseph F Sucher; S Rob Todd; Krista L Turner; Alicia Valdivia; R Matthew Sailors; Frederick A Moore Journal: J Trauma Date: 2011-05
Authors: Craig A Umscheid; Joel Betesh; Christine VanZandbergen; Asaf Hanish; Gordon Tait; Mark E Mikkelsen; Benjamin French; Barry D Fuchs Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2014-09-26 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: D C Angus; A E Barnato; D Bell; R Bellomo; C-R Chong; T J Coats; A Davies; A Delaney; D A Harrison; A Holdgate; B Howe; D T Huang; T Iwashyna; J A Kellum; S L Peake; F Pike; M C Reade; K M Rowan; M Singer; S A R Webb; L A Weissfeld; D M Yealy; J D Young Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2015-05-08 Impact factor: 17.440
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: Intensive Care Med Date: 2010-01-13 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Zhongheng Zhang; Lin Chen; Ping Xu; Qing Wang; Jianjun Zhang; Kun Chen; Casey M Clements; Leo Anthony Celi; Vitaly Herasevich; Yucai Hong Journal: NPJ Digit Med Date: 2022-07-19
Authors: Jens Michael Boss; Gagan Narula; Christian Straessle; Jan Willms; Jan Azzati; Dominique Brodbeck; Rahel Luethy; Susanne Suter; Christof Buehler; Carl Muroi; David Jule Mack; Marko Seric; Daniel Baumann; Emanuela Keller Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2022-06-14 Impact factor: 7.942
Authors: Wonsuk Oh; Pranjul Yadav; Vipin Kumar; Pedro J Caraballo; M Regina Castro; Michael S Steinbach; Gyorgy J Simon Journal: IEEE Int Conf Healthc Inform Date: 2017-09-14
Authors: Lisiane Pruinelli; Bonnie L Westra; Pranjul Yadav; Alexander Hoff; Michael Steinbach; Vipin Kumar; Connie W Delaney; Gyorgy Simon Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 9.296
Authors: Kate Honeyford; Graham S Cooke; Anne Kinderlerer; Elizabeth Williamson; Mark Gilchrist; Alison Holmes; Ben Glampson; Abdulrahim Mulla; Ceire Costelloe Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 4.497