Angelica Loza-Gomez1, Erik Hofmann2, Chun NokLam2, Michael Menchine2. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Keck School of Medicine of USC, 1200 North State, Rm 1011, Los Angeles, California, 90033, United States of America. Electronic address: lozagome@usc.edu. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Keck School of Medicine of USC, 1200 North State, Rm 1011, Los Angeles, California, 90033, United States of America.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a leading cause of death in the hospital for which aggressive treatment is recommended to improve patient outcomes. It is possible that sepsis patients brought in by emergency medical services (EMS) have a unique advantage in the emergency department (ED) which could improve sepsis bundle compliance. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient care processes and outcome differences between severe sepsis and septic shock patients in the emergency department who were brought in by EMS compared to non-EMS patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all severe sepsis and septic shock patients who declared in the ED during January 2012 thru December 2014. We compared differences in patient characteristics, patient care processes, sepsis bundle compliance metrics, and outcomes between both groups. RESULTS: Of the 1066 patients included in the study, 387 (36.6%) were brought in by EMS and 679 (63.7%) patients arrived via non-EMS transport. In the multivariate regression model, time of triage to sepsis declaration (coeff = -0.406; 95% CI = -0.809, -0.003; p = 0.048) and time of triage to physician (coeff = -0.543; 95% CI = -0.864, -0.221; p = 0.001) was significantly shorter for EMS patients. We found no statistical difference in adjusted individual sepsis compliance metrics, overall bundle compliance, or mortality between both groups. CONCLUSION: EMS transported patients have quicker sepsis declaration times and are seen sooner by ED providers. However, we found no statistical difference in bundle compliance or patient outcomes between walk in patients and EMS transported patients.
BACKGROUND:Sepsis is a leading cause of death in the hospital for which aggressive treatment is recommended to improve patient outcomes. It is possible that sepsispatients brought in by emergency medical services (EMS) have a unique advantage in the emergency department (ED) which could improve sepsis bundle compliance. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient care processes and outcome differences between severe sepsis and septic shockpatients in the emergency department who were brought in by EMS compared to non-EMS patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all severe sepsis and septic shockpatients who declared in the ED during January 2012 thru December 2014. We compared differences in patient characteristics, patient care processes, sepsis bundle compliance metrics, and outcomes between both groups. RESULTS: Of the 1066 patients included in the study, 387 (36.6%) were brought in by EMS and 679 (63.7%) patients arrived via non-EMS transport. In the multivariate regression model, time of triage to sepsis declaration (coeff = -0.406; 95% CI = -0.809, -0.003; p = 0.048) and time of triage to physician (coeff = -0.543; 95% CI = -0.864, -0.221; p = 0.001) was significantly shorter for EMS patients. We found no statistical difference in adjusted individual sepsis compliance metrics, overall bundle compliance, or mortality between both groups. CONCLUSION: EMS transported patients have quicker sepsis declaration times and are seen sooner by ED providers. However, we found no statistical difference in bundle compliance or patient outcomes between walk in patients and EMS transported patients.