Literature DB >> 31971839

Emergency Medical Services Care and Sepsis Trajectories.

Robert Liu, Ninad S Chaudhary, Donald M Yealy, David T Huang, Henry E Wang.   

Abstract

Objective: Many sepsis patients receive initial care from prehospital Emergency Medical Services (EMS). While earlier sepsis care improves outcomes, the characteristics, care and outcomes of those treated by EMS versus those arriving directly to an emergency department (ED) are currently not detailed. We sought to determine differences in hospital presentation, course and outcomes between EMS and non-EMS patients enrolled in the Protocolized Care of Early Septic Shock (ProCESS) trial.
Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of ProCESS, which studied ED patients with septic shock. EMS care was the primary exposure. We determined differences in demographics, clinical features, interventions and hospital course between EMS and non-EMS patients. Using mixed models, we determined the association between EMS care and 60-day mortality.
Results: Among 1,341 patients, 826 (61.6%) received initial EMS care. EMS patients were older, more likely to be black (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.14-1.95) or nursing home residents (5.57, 3.61-8.60), and more likely to have chronic respiratory disease (1.36, 1.04-1.78), cerebral vascular disease (1.56; 1.04-2.33), peripheral vascular disease (2.02; 1.29-3.16), and dementia (3.53; 2.04-6.10). EMS patients were more likely to present with coma (4.48; 2.53-7.96) or elevated lactate (1.30; 1.04-1.63), and to receive mechanical ventilation in the ED (7.16; 4.34-11.79). There were no differences in infection source or total intravenous fluids. Initial differences in vasopressor use (1.66; 1.22-2.26) resolved at 6 hours (1.18; 0.94-1.47). Initial differences in APACHE II (EMS 21.8 vs. non-EMS 19.0) narrowed by 48 hours (17.9 vs. 16.3, [EMS X time] interaction p = 0.003). Although EMS patients exhibited higher 60-day mortality, after adjustment for confounders, this association was not significant (1.09, 95% CI: 0.78-1.55). Conclusions: While EMS sepsis patients presented with worse chronic, nonmodifiable characteristics and higher acuity than non-EMS patients, differences in acuity narrowed after initial hospital care. Despite having higher illness burden, EMS patients did not have worse adjusted short-term mortality.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EMS; prehospital; sepsis; septic shock

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31971839      PMCID: PMC7375948          DOI: 10.1080/10903127.2019.1704321

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prehosp Emerg Care        ISSN: 1090-3127            Impact factor:   3.077


  19 in total

1.  Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock.

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

2.  The impact of emergency medical services on the ED care of severe sepsis.

Authors:  Jonathan R Studnek; Melanie R Artho; Craymon L Garner; Alan E Jones
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 2.469

3.  Prehospital sepsis alert notification decreases time to initiation of CMS sepsis core measures.

Authors:  Christopher L Hunter; Salvatore Silvestri; Amanda Stone; Anne Shaughnessy; Stacie Miller; Alexa Rodriguez; Linda Papa
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2018-09-22       Impact factor: 2.469

Review 4.  Prehospital management and identification of sepsis by emergency medical services: a systematic review.

Authors:  Daniel Lane; Robbie I Ichelson; Ian R Drennan; Damon C Scales
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 2.740

5.  Revised National Estimates of Emergency Department Visits for Sepsis in the United States.

Authors:  Henry E Wang; Allison R Jones; John P Donnelly
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 7.598

6.  EMS patients and walk-in patients presenting with severe sepsis: differences in management and outcome.

Authors:  Jon Femling; Steven Weiss; Eric Hauswald; David Tarby
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 0.954

7.  Early detection and treatment of patients with severe sepsis by prehospital personnel.

Authors:  Wayne F Guerra; Thomas R Mayfield; Mary S Meyers; Anne E Clouatre; John C Riccio
Journal:  J Emerg Med       Date:  2013-01-13       Impact factor: 1.484

8.  Opportunities for Emergency Medical Services care of sepsis.

Authors:  Henry E Wang; Matthew D Weaver; Nathan I Shapiro; Donald M Yealy
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2009-12-16       Impact factor: 5.262

9.  Prehospital Care and Emergency Department Door-to-Antibiotic Time in Sepsis.

Authors:  Ithan D Peltan; Kristina H Mitchell; Kristina E Rudd; Blake A Mann; David J Carlbom; Thomas D Rea; Allison M Butler; Catherine L Hough; Samuel M Brown
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2018-12

10.  Prehospital intravenous access and fluid resuscitation in severe sepsis: an observational cohort study.

Authors:  Christopher W Seymour; Colin R Cooke; Susan R Heckbert; John A Spertus; Clifton W Callaway; Christian Martin-Gill; Donald M Yealy; Thomas D Rea; Derek C Angus
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2014-09-27       Impact factor: 9.097

View more
  1 in total

1.  Combination of Prehospital NT-proBNP with qSOFA and NEWS to Predict Sepsis and Sepsis-Related Mortality.

Authors:  Francisco Martín-Rodríguez; Laura Melero-Guijarro; Guillermo J Ortega; Ancor Sanz-García; Teresa de la Torre de Dios; Jesús Álvarez Manzanares; José L Martín-Conty; Miguel A Castro Villamor; Juan F Delgado Benito; Raúl López-Izquierdo
Journal:  Dis Markers       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 3.434

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.