Jonathan D Baghdadi1, Mitchell D Wong2, Daniel Z Uslan3, Douglas Bell2, William E Cunningham4, Jack Needleman4, Russell Kerbel5, Robert Brook5,6,7. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. jbaghdadi@som.umaryland.edu. 2. UCLA Division of General Internal Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 3. UCLA Division of Infectious Diseases, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, Department of Health Policy and Management, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 5. UCLA Department of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 6. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA. 7. David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sepsis is the leading cause of in-hospital death. The SEP-1 sepsis bundle is a protocol for early sepsis care that requires providers to diagnose and treat sepsis quickly. Limited evidence suggests that adherence to the sepsis bundle is lower in cases of hospital-onset sepsis. OBJECTIVE: To compare sepsis bundle adherence in hospital-onset vs. community-onset sepsis. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using multivariable analysis of clinical data. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 4658 inpatients age 18 or older were identified by diagnosis codes consistent with sepsis or disseminated infection. SETTING: Four university hospitals in California between 2014 and 2016. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was adherence to key components of the sepsis bundle defined by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in their core measure, SEP-1. Covariates included clinical characteristics related to the patient, infection, and pathogen. KEY RESULTS: Compared with community-onset, cases of hospital-onset sepsis were less likely to receive SEP-1 adherent care (relative risk 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.29-0.38, p < 0.001). With the exception of vasopressors (RR 1.11, p = 0.002), each component of SEP-1 evaluated-blood cultures (RR 0.76, p < 0.001), serum lactate (RR 0.51, p < 0001), broad-spectrum antibiotics (RR 0.62, p < 0.001), intravenous fluids (0.47, p < 0.001), and follow-up lactate (RR 0.71, p < 0.001)-was less likely to be performed within the recommended time frame in hospital-onset sepsis. Within the hospital, cases of hospital-onset sepsis arising on the ward were less likely to receive SEP-1-adherent care than were cases arising in the intensive care unit (RR 0.68, p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Inpatients with hospital-onset sepsis receive different management than individuals with community-onset sepsis. It remains to be determined whether system-level factors, provider-level factors, or factors related to measurement explain the observed variation in care or whether variation in care affects outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Sepsis is the leading cause of in-hospital death. The SEP-1 sepsis bundle is a protocol for early sepsis care that requires providers to diagnose and treat sepsis quickly. Limited evidence suggests that adherence to the sepsis bundle is lower in cases of hospital-onset sepsis. OBJECTIVE: To compare sepsis bundle adherence in hospital-onset vs. community-onset sepsis. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using multivariable analysis of clinical data. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 4658 inpatients age 18 or older were identified by diagnosis codes consistent with sepsis or disseminated infection. SETTING: Four university hospitals in California between 2014 and 2016. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was adherence to key components of the sepsis bundle defined by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in their core measure, SEP-1. Covariates included clinical characteristics related to the patient, infection, and pathogen. KEY RESULTS: Compared with community-onset, cases of hospital-onset sepsis were less likely to receive SEP-1 adherent care (relative risk 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.29-0.38, p < 0.001). With the exception of vasopressors (RR 1.11, p = 0.002), each component of SEP-1 evaluated-blood cultures (RR 0.76, p < 0.001), serum lactate (RR 0.51, p < 0001), broad-spectrum antibiotics (RR 0.62, p < 0.001), intravenous fluids (0.47, p < 0.001), and follow-up lactate (RR 0.71, p < 0.001)-was less likely to be performed within the recommended time frame in hospital-onset sepsis. Within the hospital, cases of hospital-onset sepsis arising on the ward were less likely to receive SEP-1-adherent care than were cases arising in the intensive care unit (RR 0.68, p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Inpatients with hospital-onset sepsis receive different management than individuals with community-onset sepsis. It remains to be determined whether system-level factors, provider-level factors, or factors related to measurement explain the observed variation in care or whether variation in care affects outcomes.
Authors: Mervyn Singer; Clifford S Deutschman; Christopher Warren Seymour; Manu Shankar-Hari; Djillali Annane; Michael Bauer; Rinaldo Bellomo; Gordon R Bernard; Jean-Daniel Chiche; Craig M Coopersmith; Richard S Hotchkiss; Mitchell M Levy; John C Marshall; Greg S Martin; Steven M Opal; Gordon D Rubenfeld; Tom van der Poll; Jean-Louis Vincent; Derek C Angus Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-02-23 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Christopher W Seymour; Foster Gesten; Hallie C Prescott; Marcus E Friedrich; Theodore J Iwashyna; Gary S Phillips; Stanley Lemeshow; Tiffany Osborn; Kathleen M Terry; Mitchell M Levy Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-05-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Steven J Durning; Anthony R Artino; John R Boulet; Kevin Dorrance; Cees van der Vleuten; Lambert Schuwirth Journal: Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract Date: 2011-04-20 Impact factor: 3.853
Authors: Chanu Rhee; Michael R Filbin; Anthony F Massaro; Amy L Bulger; Donna McEachern; Kathleen A Tobin; Barrett T Kitch; Bert Thurlo-Walsh; Aran Kadar; Alexandra Koffman; Anupam Pande; Yasir Hamad; David K Warren; Travis M Jones; Cara O'Brien; Deverick J Anderson; Rui Wang; Michael Klompas Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Andrew Rhodes; Gary Phillips; Richard Beale; Maurizio Cecconi; Jean Daniel Chiche; Daniel De Backer; Jigeeshu Divatia; Bin Du; Laura Evans; Ricard Ferrer; Massimo Girardis; Despoina Koulenti; Flavia Machado; Steven Q Simpson; Cheng Cheng Tan; Xavier Wittebole; Mitchell Levy Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Malvin Torsvik; Lise Tuset Gustad; Arne Mehl; Inger Lise Bangstad; Liv Jorun Vinje; Jan Kristian Damås; Erik Solligård Journal: Crit Care Date: 2016-08-05 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Jennifer C Ginestra; Rachel Kohn; Rebecca A Hubbard; Andrew Crane-Droesch; Scott D Halpern; Meeta Prasad Kerlin; Gary E Weissman Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2022-09