Epidemiology of Hospital-Onset Versus Community-Onset Sepsis in U.S. Hospitals and Association With Mortality: A Retrospective Analysis Using Electronic Clinical Data

Electronic early notification of sepsis in hospitalized ward patients: a study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial

Background

To evaluate the effect of screening for sepsis using an electronic sepsis alert vs. no alert in hospitalized ward patients on 90-day in-hospital mortality.

Methods

The SCREEN trial is designed as a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial. Hospital wards (total of 45 wards, constituting clusters in this design) are randomized to have active alert vs. masked alert, 5 wards at a time, with each 5 wards constituting a sequence. The study consists of ten 2-month periods with a phased introduction of the intervention. In the first period, all wards have a masked alert for 2 months. Afterwards the intervention (alert system) is implemented in a new sequence every 2-month period until the intervention is implemented in all sequences. The intervention includes the implementation of an electronic alert system developed in the hospital electronic medical records based on the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA). The alert system sends notifications of “possible sepsis alert” to the bedside nurse, charge nurse, and primary medical team and requires an acknowledgment in the health information system from the bedside nurse and physician. The calculated sample size is 65,250. The primary endpoint is in-hospital mortality by 90 days.

Discussion

The trial started on October 1, 2019, and is expected to complete patient follow-up by the end of October 2021.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04078594. Registered on September 6, 2019

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05562-5.

Prevalence and factors associated with sepsis and septic shock in oncological patients in intensive therapy

OBJECTIVES

to analyze factors associated with sepsis and septic shock in cancer patients in the Intensive Care Unit.

METHODS

cross-sectional, retrospective study with a quantitative approach, with a sample of 239 patients in an oncology hospital. Secondary data from medical records were used. The outcome variable was "presence of sepsis and/or septic shock"; and exposures: sex, length of stay, origin, use of invasive procedures and primary tumor site. Descriptive, bivariate analyzes and multiple logistic regression models were performed.

RESULTS

the prevalence of sepsis was 95% CI: 14.7-24.7 and septic shock of 95% CI: 37.7-50.3. In the multiple analysis, sepsis and/or septic shock were associated with hospital stay longer than seven days, being from the Emergency Department, presence of invasive procedures and hematological site.

CONCLUSIONS

sepsis and/or septic shock in cancer patients were associated with clinical characteristics and health care factors.

Rapid Response System Improves Sepsis Bundle Compliances and Survival in Hospital Wards for 10 Years

BACKGROUND

Hospitalized patients can develop septic shock at any time. Therefore, it is important to identify septic patients in hospital wards and rapidly perform the optimal treatment. Although the sepsis bundle has already been reported to improve survival rates, the controversy over evidence of the effect of in-hospital sepsis continues to exist. We aimed to estimate the outcomes and bundle compliance of patients with septic shock in hospital wards managed through the rapid response system (RRS).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of 976 patients with septic shock managed through the RRS at an academic, tertiary care hospital in Korea from 2008 to 2017.

RESULTS

Of the 976 enrolled patients, the compliance of each sepsis bundle was high (80.8-100.0%), but the overall success rate of the bundle was low (58.3%). The compliance rate for achieving the overall sepsis bundle increased from 26.5% to 70.0%, and the 28-day mortality continuously decreased from 50% to 32.1% over 10 years. We analyzed the two groups according to whether they completed the overall sepsis bundle or not. Of the 976 enrolled patients, 569 (58.3%) sepsis bundles were completed, whereas 407 (41.7%) were incomplete. The complete bundle group showed lower 28-day mortality than the incomplete bundle group (37.1% vs. 53.6%, p < 0.001). In the multivariate multiple logistic regression model, the 28-day mortality was significantly associated with the complete bundle (adjusted odds ratio (OR), 0.61; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.40-0.91; p = 0.017). The obtaining of blood cultures (adjusted OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.33-0.63; p < 0.001) and lactate re-measurement (adjusted OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50-0.95; p = 0.024) in each component of the sepsis bundle were associated with the 28-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The rapid response system provides improving sepsis bundle compliances and survival in patients with septic shock in hospital wards.

Initial antimicrobial management of sepsis

Sepsis is a common consequence of infection, associated with a mortality rate > 25%. Although community-acquired sepsis is more common, hospital-acquired infection is more lethal. The most common site of infection is the lung, followed by abdominal infection, catheter-associated blood steam infection and urinary tract infection. Gram-negative sepsis is more common than gram-positive infection, but sepsis can also be due to fungal and viral pathogens. To reduce mortality, it is necessary to give immediate, empiric, broad-spectrum therapy to those with severe sepsis and/or shock, but this approach can drive antimicrobial overuse and resistance and should be accompanied by a commitment to de-escalation and antimicrobial stewardship. Biomarkers such a procalcitonin can provide decision support for antibiotic use, and may identify patients with a low likelihood of infection, and in some settings, can guide duration of antibiotic therapy. Sepsis can involve drug-resistant pathogens, and this often necessitates consideration of newer antimicrobial agents.

2019 John M. Eisenberg Patient Safety and Quality Awards: A Model Cell for Transformational Redesign of Sepsis Identification and Treatment: Aligning Digital Tools with Innovative Workflows

BACKGROUND

Readmission after hospitalization, increased morbidity, and high levels of mortality are not uncommon in patients diagnosed with sepsis. Sepsis bundles designed to mitigate the deleterious effects have been recommended for nearly a decade. Despite this, mortality remains high, sepsis bundle requirements controversial, and bundle compliance low.

METHODS

A health system implemented a multidisciplinary project to decrease the mortality rate of sepsis. A Model Cell mental model was adopted. Data on mortality and compliance were gathered from four acute care hospitals in the system and analyzed. The observed mortality data were compared to predictive data based on comparable acute care facilities.

RESULTS

Regression analysis showed significant increases in bundle compliance rates at each site (p < 0.05), reflecting the continuous use of the methods described above. Mortality systemwide decreased significantly in response to increased bundle compliance (r = 0.80, r² = 0.64, p < 0.001), with compliance alone accounting for nearly two thirds of the variance in the linear model. The observed results revealed a median mortality rate of 5.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.1%-7.3%, n = 23), 1.9 percentage points lower than predicted when compared to similar institutions. When using only the final 12 months of the project, the median mortality drops further to 5.3% (95% CI = 3.9%-5.6%, n = 12), 2.5 percentage points less than predicted.

CONCLUSION

The Model Cell intervention was successful in increasing bundle compliance, which then decreased mortality. This model can be enhanced as technology improves and is well positioned for artificial intelligence to help drive further success.

Ambulatory Risk Models for the Long-Term Prevention of Sepsis: Retrospective Study

Background

Sepsis is a life-threatening condition that can rapidly lead to organ damage and death. Existing risk scores predict outcomes for patients who have already become acutely ill.

Objective

We aimed to develop a model for identifying patients at risk of getting sepsis within 2 years in order to support the reduction of sepsis morbidity and mortality.

Methods

Machine learning was applied to 2,683,049 electronic health records (EHRs) with over 64 million encounters across five states to develop models for predicting a patient’s risk of getting sepsis within 2 years. Features were selected to be easily obtainable from a patient’s chart in real time during ambulatory encounters.

Results

The models showed consistent prediction scores, with the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.82 and a positive likelihood ratio of 2.9 achieved with gradient boosting on all features combined. Predictive features included age, sex, ethnicity, average ambulatory heart rate, standard deviation of BMI, and the number of prior medical conditions and procedures. The findings identified both known and potential new risk factors for long-term sepsis. Model variations also illustrated trade-offs between incrementally higher accuracy, implementability, and interpretability.

Conclusions

Accurate implementable models were developed to predict the 2-year risk of sepsis, using EHR data that is easy to obtain from ambulatory encounters. These results help advance the understanding of sepsis and provide a foundation for future trials of risk-informed preventive care.

Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes After the Introduction of the Medicare Sepsis Performance Measure (SEP-1)

BACKGROUND

Medicare requires that hospitals report on their adherence to the Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Early Management Bundle (SEP-1).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of SEP-1 on treatment patterns and patient outcomes.

DESIGN

Longitudinal study of hospitals using repeated cross-sectional cohorts of patients.

SETTING

11 hospitals within an integrated health system.

PATIENTS

54 225 encounters between January 2013 and December 2017 for adults with sepsis who were hospitalized through the emergency department.

INTERVENTION

Onset of the SEP-1 reporting requirement in October 2015.

MEASUREMENTS

Changes in SEP-1-targeted processes, including antibiotic administration, lactate measurement, and fluid administration at 3 hours from sepsis onset; repeated lactate and vasopressor administration for hypotension within 6 hours of sepsis onset; and sepsis outcomes, including risk-adjusted intensive care unit (ICU) admission, in-hospital mortality, and home discharge among survivors.

RESULTS

Two years after its implementation, SEP-1 was associated with variable changes in process measures, with the greatest effect being an increase in lactate measurement within 3 hours of sepsis onset (absolute increase, 23.7 percentage points [95% CI, 20.7 to 26.7 percentage points]; P < 0.001). There were small increases in antibiotic administration (absolute increase, 4.7 percentage points [CI, 1.9 to 7.6 percentage points]; P = 0.001) and fluid administration of 30 mL/kg of body weight within 3 hours of sepsis onset (absolute increase, 3.4 percentage points [CI, 1.5 to 5.2 percentage points]; P < 0.001). There was no change in vasopressor administration. There was a small increase in ICU admissions (absolute increase, 2.0 percentage points [CI, 0 to 4.0 percentage points]; P = 0.055) and no changes in mortality (absolute change, 0.1 percentage points [CI, -0.9 to 1.1 percentage points]; P = 0.87) or discharge to home.

LIMITATION

Data are from a single health system.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of the SEP-1 mandatory reporting program was associated with variable changes in process measures, without improvements in clinical outcomes. Revising the measure may optimize its future effect.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Infectious Diseases Society of America Position Paper: Recommended Revisions to the National Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Early Management Bundle (SEP-1) Sepsis Quality Measure

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Early Management Bundle (SEP-1) measure has appropriately established sepsis as a national priority. However, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA and five additional endorsing societies) is concerned about SEP-1's potential to drive antibiotic overuse because it does not account for the high rate of sepsis overdiagnosis and encourages aggressive antibiotics for all patients with possible sepsis, regardless of the certainty of diagnosis or severity of illness. IDSA is also concerned that SEP-1's complex "time zero" definition is not evidence-based and is prone to inter-observer variation. In this position paper, IDSA outlines several recommendations aimed at reducing the risk of unintended consequences of SEP-1 while maintaining focus on its evidence-based elements. IDSA's core recommendation is to limit SEP-1 to septic shock, for which the evidence supporting the benefit of immediate antibiotics is greatest. Prompt empiric antibiotics are often appropriate for suspected sepsis without shock, but IDSA believes there is too much heterogeneity and difficulty defining this population, uncertainty about the presence of infection, and insufficient data on the necessity of immediate antibiotics to support a mandatory treatment standard for all patients in this category. IDSA believes guidance on managing possible sepsis without shock is more appropriate for guidelines that can delineate the strengths and limitations of supporting evidence and allow clinicians discretion in applying specific recommendations to individual patients. Removing sepsis without shock from SEP-1 will mitigate the risk of unnecessary antibiotic prescribing for noninfectious syndromes, simplify data abstraction, increase measure reliability, and focus attention on the population most likely to benefit from immediate empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics.

Surveillance for Healthcare-Associated Infections: Hospital-Onset Adult Sepsis Events versus Current Reportable Conditions

BACKGROUND

U.S. hospitals are required by CMS to publicly report CLABSI, CAUTI, C.diffficile, MRSA bacteremia, and selected SSIs for benchmarking and pay-for-performance programs. It is unclear, however, to what extent these conditions capture the full breadth of serious healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). CDC's hospital-onset Adult Sepsis Event (HO-ASE) definition could facilitate more comprehensive and efficient surveillance for serious HAIs, but the overlap between HO-ASE and currently reportable HAIs is unknown.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed the overlap between HO-ASEs and reportable HAIs among adults hospitalized between June 2015-June 2018 in 3 hospitals. Medical record reviews were conducted for 110 randomly selected HO-ASE cases to determine clinical correlates.

RESULTS

Amongst 282,441 hospitalized patients, 2,301 (0.8%) met HO-ASE criteria and 1,260 (0.4%) had reportable HAIs. In-hospital mortality rates were higher with HO-ASEs than reportable HAIs (28.6% vs 12.9%). Mortality rates for HO-ASE missed by reportable HAIs were substantially higher than mortality rates for reportable HAIs missed by HO-ASE (28.1% vs 6.3%). Reportable HAIs were only present in 334/2,301 (14.5%) HO-ASEs, most commonly CLABSIs (6.0% of HO-ASEs), C.difficile (5.0%), and CAUTI (3.0%). On medical record review, most HO-ASEs were caused by pneumonia (39.1%, of which only 34.9% were ventilator-associated), bloodstream infections (17.4%, of which only 10.5% were central line-associated), non-C.difficile intra-abdominal infections (14.5%), urinary infections (7.3%, of which 87.5% were catheter-associated), and skin/soft tissue infections (6.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

CDC's HO-ASE definition detects many serious nosocomial infections missed by currently reportable HAIs. HO-ASE surveillance could increase the efficiency and clinical significance of surveillance while identifying new targets for prevention.

Surveillance Strategies for Tracking Sepsis Incidence and Outcomes

Sepsis is a leading cause of death and the target of intense efforts to improve recognition, management and outcomes. Accurate sepsis surveillance is essential to properly interpreting the impact of quality improvement initiatives, making meaningful comparisons across hospitals and geographic regions, and guiding future research and resource investments. However, it is challenging to reliably track sepsis incidence and outcomes because sepsis is a heterogeneous clinical syndrome without a pathologic reference standard, allowing for subjectivity and broad discretion in assigning diagnoses. Most epidemiologic studies of sepsis to date have used hospital discharge codes and have suggested dramatic increases in sepsis incidence and decreases in mortality rates over time. However, diagnosis and coding practices vary widely between hospitals and are changing over time, complicating the interpretation of absolute rates and trends. Other surveillance approaches include death records, prospective clinical registries, retrospective medical record reviews, and analyses of the usual care arms of randomized controlled trials. Each of these strategies, however, has substantial limitations. Recently, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released an "Adult Sepsis Event" definition that uses objective clinical indicators of infection and organ dysfunction that can be extracted from most hospitals' electronic health record systems. Emerging data suggest that electronic health record-based clinical surveillance, such as surveillance of Adult Sepsis Event, is accurate, can be applied uniformly across diverse hospitals, and generates more credible estimates of sepsis trends than administrative data. In this review, we discuss the advantages and limitations of different sepsis surveillance strategies and consider future directions.

Prevalence and Clinical Characteristics of Patients With Sepsis Discharge Diagnosis Codes and Short Lengths of Stay in U.S. Hospitals

OBJECTIVES

Some patients diagnosed with sepsis have very brief hospitalizations. Understanding the prevalence and clinical characteristics of these patients may provide insight into how sepsis diagnoses are being applied as well as the breadth of illnesses encompassed by current sepsis definitions.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

SETTING

One-hundred ten U.S. hospitals in the Cerner HealthFacts dataset (primary cohort) and four hospitals in Eastern Massachusetts (secondary cohort used for detailed medical record reviews).

PATIENTS

Adults hospitalized from April 2016 to December 2017.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We identified hospitalizations with International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition codes for sepsis (including sepsis, septicemia, severe sepsis, and septic shock) and compared "short stay sepsis" patients (defined as discharge alive within 3 d) versus nonshort stay sepsis patients using detailed electronic health record data. In the Cerner cohort, 67,733 patients had sepsis discharge diagnosis codes, including 6,918 (10.2%) with short stays. Compared with nonshort stay sepsis patients, short stay patients were younger (median age 60 vs 67 yr) and had fewer comorbidities (median Elixhauser score 5 vs 13), lower rates of positive blood cultures (8.2% vs 24.1%), lower rates of ICU admission (6.2% vs 31.6%), and less frequently had severe sepsis/septic shock codes (13.5% vs 36.6%). Almost all short stay and nonshort stay sepsis patients met systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria at admission (84.5% and 87.5%, respectively); 47.2% of those with short stays had Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores of 2 or greater at admission versus 73.2% of those with longer stays. Findings were similar in the secondary four-hospital cohort. Medical record reviews demonstrated that physicians commonly diagnosed sepsis based on the presence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, elevated lactates, or positive blood cultures without concurrent organ dysfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large U.S. cohort, one in 10 patients coded for sepsis were discharged alive within 3 days. Although most short stay patients met systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, they met Sepsis-3 criteria less than half the time. Our findings underscore the incomplete uptake of Sepsis-3 definitions, the breadth of illness severities encompassed by both traditional and new sepsis definitions, and the possibility that some patients with sepsis recover very rapidly.

Key Challenges in Providing Effective Antibiotic Therapy for Critically Ill Patients with Bacterial Sepsis and Septic Shock

Early initiation of effective antibiotic therapy is vitally important for saving the lives of critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock. The susceptibility of the infecting pathogen and the ability of the selected dosage regimen to safely achieve the required antibiotic exposure need to be carefully considered to achieve a high probability of a successful outcome. Critically ill patients commonly experience substantial pathophysiological changes that impact the functions of various organs, including the kidneys. Many antibiotics are predominantly renally eliminated and thus renal function is a major determinant of the regimen needed to achieve the required antibiotic exposure. However, currently, there is a paucity of guidelines to inform antibiotic dosing in critically ill patients, including those with sepsis or septic shock. This paper briefly reviews methods that are commonly used in critically ill patients to provide a measure of renal function, and approaches that describe the relationship between the exposure to an antibiotic and its antibacterial effects. Two common conditions that very substantially complicate the use of antibiotics in critically ill patients with sepsis, unstable renal function, and augmented renal clearance, are considered in detail and their potential therapeutic implications are explored. Suggestions are provided on how treatment of bacterial infections in critically ill patients with sepsis might be improved. Of high potential are model-informed approaches that aim to individualize initial treatment regimens based on patient and bacterial characteristics, with refinement of regimens during treatment in response to monitoring antibiotic concentrations, responsive measures of renal function, and other important clinical data.

A novel procalcitonin-based score for detecting sepsis among critically ill patients

Background

Procalcitonin (PCT) has been widely investigated as an infection biomarker. The study aimed to prove that serum PCT, combining with other relevant variables, has an even better sepsis-detecting ability in critically ill patients.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a regional teaching hospital enrolling eligible patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) between July 1, 2016, and December 31, 2016, and followed them until March 31, 2017. The primary outcome measurement was the occurrence of sepsis. We used multivariate logistic regression analysis to determine the independent factors for sepsis and constructed a novel PCT-based score containing these factors. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) was applied to evaluate sepsis-detecting abilities. Finally, we validated the score using a validation cohort.

Results

A total of 258 critically ill patients (70.9±16.3 years; 55.4% man) were enrolled in the derivation cohort and further subgrouped into the sepsis group (n = 115) and the non-sepsis group (n = 143). By using the multivariate logistic regression analysis, we disclosed five independent factors for detecting sepsis, namely, “serum PCT level,” “albumin level” and “neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio” at ICU admission, along with “diabetes mellitus,” and “with vasopressor.” We subsequently constructed a PCT-based score containing the five weighted factors. The PCT-based score performed well in detecting sepsis with the cut-points of 8 points (AUROC 0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74–0.85; sensitivity 0.70; specificity 0.76), which was better than PCT alone, C-reactive protein and infection probability score. The findings were confirmed using an independent validation cohort (n = 72, 69.2±16.7 years, 62.5% men) (cut-point: 8 points; AUROC, 0.79; 95% CI 0.69–0.90; sensitivity 0.64; specificity 0.87).

Conclusions

We proposed a novel PCT-based score that performs better in detecting sepsis than serum PCT levels alone, C-reactive protein, and infection probability score.

Sepsis Among Medicare Beneficiaries: 1. The Burdens of Sepsis, 2012-2018

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

To provide contemporary estimates of the burdens (costs and mortality) associated with acute inpatient Medicare beneficiary admissions for sepsis.

Abrupt Discontinuation Versus Down-Titration of Vasopressin in Patients Recovering from Septic Shock

PURPOSE

To compare patient outcomes based on management of arginine vasopressin (AVP) during the recovery phase of septic shock (abrupt vs. tapering discontinuation).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Multicenter, retrospective cohort study of patients receiving AVP with concomitant norepinephrine for septic shock. Primary outcome measure was time to intensive care unit (ICU) discharge (from decision to titrate or stop AVP). Secondary outcomes included ICU and hospital mortality, and incidence of hypotension.

RESULTS

A total of 958 (73%) abrupt discontinuation and 360 (27%) down-titration patients were included. Patient characteristics and septic shock treatment courses were similar between groups. Median time to ICU discharge was similar between abrupt discontinuation (7.9 days, 95% CI 7.2-8.7 days) and tapered patients (7.3 days, 95% CI 6.3-9.3 days, P = 0.60). After controlling for baseline discrepancies, down-titration was not an independent predictor of time to ICU discharge (HR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.85-1.15, P = 0.91). There was no difference in ICU mortality (21.8% vs. 18.0%, P = 0.13) or hospital mortality (28.9% vs. 31.1%, P = 0.44). Although incidence of hypotension was similar (39.7% vs. 41.7%, P = 0.53), patients in the down-titration group more frequently required an escalation of AVP dose (5.7% vs. 11.1%, P < 0.001). Median AVP duration was shorter in the abrupt discontinuation group (1.4 days [IQR: 0.6-2.6 days] vs. 1.8 days [IQR: 1.1-3.2 days], P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A difference in time to ICU discharge was not detected between abrupt AVP discontinuation and down-titration in patients recovering from septic shock. In patients recovering from septic shock, abrupt discontinuation of AVP appears to be safe and may lead to shortened AVP duration.

Improvements in Sepsis-associated Mortality in Hospitalized Patients with Cancer versus Those without Cancer. A 12-Year Analysis Using Clinical Data

Rationale: There have been advances in both cancer and sepsis treatment over the past several decades, yet little is known about trends in sepsis-associated mortality in patients with versus without cancer.Objectives: To assess trends in sepsis-associated mortality in hospitalized patients with and without cancer using objective clinical criteria to identify sepsis and detailed clinical data to adjust for severity of illness.Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study at a tertiary referral hospital and cancer center. Adult in-patients with clinical indicators of sepsis (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Adult Sepsis Event criteria) were identified between 2003 and 2014. Patients with cancer were identified using diagnosis codes from their hospitalization or the preceding 90 days. Sepsis-associated in-hospital mortality rates were assessed in 3-year intervals. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to adjust for case mix and severity of illness and to test for subgroup interactions in trends.Results: The cohort included 20,975 patients with sepsis, of whom 7,489 (35.7%) had cancer (61.7% solid and 38.3% hematologic). Sepsis-associated mortality rates in patients with cancer decreased from 31.3% in 2003-2005 to 26.0% in 2012-2014 (absolute decrease, 5.2% [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.3-8.2%]). This mortality reduction persisted after risk adjustment (adjusted odds ratio, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.45-0.63] in 2012-2014 relative to 2003-2005). In contrast, sepsis-associated mortality rates increased in patients without cancer from 20.9% in 2003-2005 to 23.9% in 2012-2014 (absolute increase, 2.1% [95% CI, 0.1-4.1%]), but were stable after risk-adjustment (adjusted odds ratio, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.79-1.03]) (P < 0.001 for comparison of trends between patients with vs. without cancer on both crude and adjusted analysis). Among patients with cancer, declines in risk-adjusted sepsis-associated mortality were observed in both solid and hematologic cancer subgroups, with both community-onset and hospital-onset sepsis, in patients receiving active cancer treatments, and in patients requiring mechanical ventilation at sepsis onset.Conclusions: Sepsis-associated mortality rates declined significantly over a 12-year period in patients with cancer, but not in patients without cancer. Potential explanations include advances in the management of cancer and/or better sepsis treatments specifically in patients with cancer. Further research is needed to elucidate the reasons for our findings and to assess their generalizability to other hospitals.

Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D and the risk of mortality in adult patients with Sepsis: a meta-analysis

Background

Vitamin D deficiency has been related to the risk of sepsis. However, previous studies showed inconsistent results regarding the association between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25 (OH) D) and mortality risk in septic patients. We aimed to evaluate the relationship between serum 25 (OH) D at admission and mortality risk in adult patients in a meta-analysis.

Methods

Follow-up studies that provided data of multivariate adjusted relative risk (RR) between serum 25 (OH) D and mortality risk in septic patients were retrieved via systematic search of PubMed and Embase databases. A random effect model was used to pool the results.

Results

Eight studies with 1736 patients were included. Results of overall meta-analysis showed that lower 25 (OH) D at admission was independently associated with increased risk or mortality (adjusted RR: 1.93, p < 0.001; I² = 63%) in patients with sepsis. Exploring subgroup association showed that patients with severe vitamin D deficiency (25 (OH) D < 10 ng/ml) was significantly associated with higher mortality risk (adjusted RR: 1.92, p < 0.001), but the associations were not significant for vitamin D insufficiency (25 (OH) D 20~30 ng/ml) or deficiency (25 (OH) D 10~20 ng/ml). Further analyses showed that the association between lower serum 25 (OH) D and higher mortality risk were consistent in studies applied different diagnostic criteria for sepsis (systemic inflammatory response syndrome, Sepsis-2.0, or Sepsis-3.0), short-term (within 1 month) and long-term studies (3~12 months), and in prospective and retrospective studies.

Conclusions

Severe vitamin D deficiency may be independently associated with increased mortality in adult patients with sepsis. Large-scale prospective studies are needed to validate our findings.

Excess Length of Acute Inpatient Stay Attributable to Acquisition of Hospital-Onset Gram-Negative Bloodstream Infection with and without Antibiotic Resistance: A Multistate Model Analysis

Excess length of stay (LOS) is an important outcome when assessing the burden of nosocomial infection, but it can be subject to survival bias. We aimed to estimate the change in LOS attributable to hospital-onset (HO) Escherichia coli/Klebsiella spp. bacteremia using multistate models to circumvent survival bias. We analyzed a cohort of all patients with HO E.coli/Klebsiella spp. bacteremia and matched uninfected control patients within the U.S. Veterans Health Administration System in 2003–2013. A multistate model was used to estimate the change in LOS as an effect of the intermediate state (HO-bacteremia). We stratified analyses by susceptibilities to fluoroquinolones (fluoroquinolone susceptible (FQ-S)/fluoroquinolone resistant (FQ-R)) and extended-spectrum cephalosporins (ESC susceptible (ESC-S)/ESC resistant (ESC-R)). Among the 5964 patients with HO bacteremia analyzed, 957 (16.9%) and 1638 (28.9%) patients had organisms resistant to FQ and ESC, respectively. Any HO E.coli/Klebsiella bacteremia was associated with excess LOS, and both FQ-R and ESC-R were associated with a longer LOS than susceptible strains, but the additional burdens attributable to resistance were small compared to HO bacteremia itself (FQ-S: 12.13 days vs. FQ-R: 12.94 days, difference: 0.81 days (95% CI: 0.56–1.05), p < 0.001 and ESC-S: 11.57 days vs. ESC-R: 16.56 days, difference: 4.99 days (95% CI: 4.75–5.24), p < 0.001). Accurate measurements of excess attributable LOS associated with resistance can help support the business case for infection control interventions.

Validation of automated sepsis surveillance based on the Sepsis-3 clinical criteria against physician record review in a general hospital population: observational study using electronic health records data

BACKGROUND

Surveillance of sepsis incidence is important for directing resources and evaluating quality-of-care interventions. The aim was to develop and validate a fully-automated Sepsis-3 based surveillance system in non-intensive care wards using electronic health record (EHR) data, and demonstrate utility by determining the burden of hospital-onset sepsis and variations between wards.

METHODS

A rule-based algorithm was developed using EHR data from a cohort of all adult patients admitted at an academic centre between July 2012 and December 2013. Time in intensive care units was censored. To validate algorithm performance, a stratified random sample of 1000 hospital admissions (674 with and 326 without suspected infection) was classified according to the Sepsis-3 clinical criteria (suspected infection defined as having any culture taken and at least two doses of antimicrobials administered, and an increase in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score by >2 points) and the likelihood of infection by physician medical record review.

RESULTS

In total 82 653 hospital admissions were included. The Sepsis-3 clinical criteria determined by physician review were met in 343 of 1000 episodes. Among them, 313 (91%) had possible, probable or definite infection. Based on this reference, the algorithm achieved sensitivity 0.887 (95% CI: 0.799 to 0.964), specificity 0.985 (95% CI: 0.978 to 0.991), positive predictive value 0.881 (95% CI: 0.833 to 0.926) and negative predictive value 0.986 (95% CI: 0.973 to 0.996). When applied to the total cohort taking into account the sampling proportions of those with and without suspected infection, the algorithm identified 8599 (10.4%) sepsis episodes. The burden of hospital-onset sepsis (>48 hour after admission) and related in-hospital mortality varied between wards.

CONCLUSIONS

A fully-automated Sepsis-3 based surveillance algorithm using EHR data performed well compared with physician medical record review in non-intensive care wards, and exposed variations in hospital-onset sepsis incidence between wards.

Early Experience with a Novel Strategy for Assessment of Sepsis Risk: The Shock Huddle

Introduction

Severe sepsis/septic shock (SS), a leading cause of death in children, is a complex clinical syndrome that can be challenging to diagnose. To assist with the early and accurate diagnosis of this illness, we instituted an electronic scoring tool and developed a novel strategy for the assessment of currently hospitalized children at risk for SS.

Methods

The Shock Tool was created to alert providers to children at risk for SS. Above a threshold score of 45, patients were evaluated by a team from the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU), led by the Shock Nurse (RN), a specially trained PICU nurse, to assess their need for further therapies. Data related to this evaluation, termed a Shock Huddle, were collected and reviewed with the intensivist fellow on service.

Results

Over 1 year, 9,241 hospitalized patients were screened using the Shock Score. There were 206 Shock Huddles on 109 unique patients. Nearly 40% of Shock Huddles included a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention at the time of patient assessment, with the most frequent intervention being a fluid bolus. Shock Huddles resulted in a patient transfer to the PICU 10% of the time.

Conclusion

Implementation of an electronic medical record-based sepsis recognition tool paired with a novel strategy for rapid assessment of at-risk patients by a Shock RN is feasible and offers an alternative strategy to a traditional medical emergency team for the delivery of sepsis-related care. Further study is needed to describe the impact of this process on patient outcomes.