Impact of nurse-initiated ED sepsis protocol on compliance with sepsis bundles, time to initial antibiotic administration, and in-hospital mortality

Facilitators and barriers of appropriate and timely initiation of intravenous fluids in patients with sepsis in emergency departments: a consensus development Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is a life-threatening medical emergency in which appropriate and timely administration of intravenous fluids to patients with features of hypotension is critical to prevent multi-organ failure and subsequent death. However, compliance with recommended fluid administration is reported to be poor. There is a lack of consensus among emergency clinicians on some of the determinant factors influencing fluid administration in sepsis. Thus, the aim of this study was to identify the level of consensus among key stakeholders in emergency departments regarding the facilitators, barriers, and strategies to improve fluid administration.

METHODS

The modified Delphi questionnaire with 23 statements exploring barriers, facilitators, and strategies to improve fluid administration was developed from the integration of findings from previous phases of the study involving emergency department clinicians. A two-round modified Delphi survey was conducted among key stakeholders with managerial, educational, supervision and leadership responsibilities using a "Reactive Delphi technique" from March 2023 to June 2023. The statements were rated for importance on a 9-point Likert scale. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) was used to identify the level of consensus (agreement/disagreement).

RESULTS

Of the 21 panellists who completed Round 1 survey, 18 (86%) also completed Round 2. The panellists rated 9 out of 10 (90%) barriers, 3 out of 4 (75%) facilitators and all 9 (100%) improvement strategies as important. Out of the total 23 statements, 18 (78%) had agreement among the panellists. Incomplete vital signs at triage (Median = 9, IQR 7.25 to 9.00) as a barrier, awareness of importance of fluid administration in sepsis (Median = 9, IQR 8.00 to 9.00) as facilitator and provision of nurse-initiated intravenous fluids (Median = 9, IQR 8.00 to 9.00) as an improvement strategy were the highest rated statements.

CONCLUSION

This is the first Delphi study identifying consensus on facilitators, barriers, and strategies to specifically improve intravenous fluid administration in sepsis in Australia. We identified 18 consensus-based factors associated with appropriate and timely administration of intravenous fluids in sepsis. This study offers empirical evidence to support the implementation of the identified strategies to improve patient outcomes.

Using machine learning for process improvement in sepsis management

INTRODUCTION

In the U.S., sepsis afflicts 1.7 million adults, causing 270,000 deaths each year. Early detection of sepsis could decrease the number of deaths by 92,000 annually and decrease hospital expenditures by 1.5 billion USD. Few prior studies and reviews have presented a holistic understanding of the relationship between machine learning and existing process improvement measures. This study, in addition to discussing machine learning and existing process improvements measures, elaborates on the disadvantages and the barriers to integrating machine learning into the clinic. This article synthesizes previous studies to educate healthcare professionals on effectively managing sepsis by leveraging the benefits of machine learning.

METHODS

This study used the PubMed database. Search terms include sepsis antibiotics, sepsis process improvement, sepsis machine learning. Our search criteria included previous studies published between January 1, 2017, and February 1, 2022.

RESULTS/DISCUSSION

Although machine learning algorithms have better predictive capabilities, their effectiveness in the clinical setting is limited as studies show mixed results because the medical staff often fails to intervene. To overcome poor interventional response, clinicians need to work with the facility's IT department to ensure integration into clinical workflow and minimize alert-fatigue. Algorithms should enhance the productivity of clinical teams, not attempt to replace them entirely.

CONCLUSION

Hospitals can employ process improvement measures that effectively utilize machine learning algorithms to ensure integration into clinical workflows. Healthcare professionals can utilize workflow tools in addition to the predictive capabilities of machine learning to enhance clinical decisions in sepsis.

A Coordinated and Multidisciplinary Strategy can Reduce the Time for Antibiotics in Septic Patients at a University Hospital

Objectives

We carried out this work with the aim of assessing the effectiveness of a set of interventions over time for the administration of antibiotics.

Design

Prospective observational study.

Setting

Patients admitted to the emergency room and ICU of the hospital where the study was conducted are evaluated daily for some sociodemographic and clinical variables. Among them are some quality indicators, such as the time between the diagnosis of sepsis or septic shock until the start of the infusion of antibiotics. This indicator reflects several aspects related to a set of assistance measures (adequacy of antibiotic dispensation, rapid response team (RRT), sepsis care quality improvement program, antimicrobial management program, improvements in emergency department assistance).

Patients or participants

Patients with sepsis or septic shock were admitted to the ICU of a university and public hospital in southern Brazil.

Main variables of interest

The time between the diagnosis of sepsis or septic shock and the beginning of the infusion of antibiotics.

Results

Between 2013 and 2018, 1676 patients were evaluated. The mean time for antibiotic infusion decreased from 6.1 ± 8.6 hours to 1.7 ± 2.9 hours (p < 0.001). The percentage of patients who received antibiotics in the first hour increased from 20.7 to 59.0% (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

In this study, we demonstrated that a set of actions adopted in a large tertiary hospital was associated with decreased time to start antibiotic therapy in septic patients.

How to cite this article

Moraes RB, Haas JS, Vidart J, Nicolaidis R, Deutschendorf C, Moretti MMS, et al. A Coordinated and Multidisciplinary Strategy can Reduce the Time for Antibiotics in Septic Patients at a University Hospital. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(7):465-469.

Systematic Review on the Effects of Prompt Antibiotic Treatment on Survival in Septic Shock and Sepsis Patients in Different Hospital Settings

This study aims to determine the impact of prompt administration of antibiotics in evaluating the prognosis of patients with septic shock or sepsis. On January 1, 2022, we searched the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases for English-language articles regarding when antibiotics should be administered to patients with septic shock or sepsis. These articles were required to be published between 2010 and 2021. The primary objective was sudden or expected death from any cause at a specified time. In the study, 154,330 patients from 35 sepsis trials were included. In 19 trials, the effectiveness of antibiotics administered to 20,062 patients was evaluated. Of those, 16,652 received the correct medications. In 24 studies, the length of time it took to administer antibiotics was associated with an increased mortality rate. In fourteen studies, the time limits associated with patient outcomes ranged from 1 to 125 minutes to three to six hours. In eight studies, there were hourly delays, and in two, the time it took to receive an antibiotic played a role. Separately analyzed, the outcomes for septic shock (12,756 patients in 11 trials) and sepsis (24,282 patients in six studies) were identical. Two-thirds of sepsis studies discovered a correlation between early antibiotic treatment and the patient's prognosis. However, antimicrobial timing metrics varied significantly between studies, and there were no clear time limits.

Association of Registered Nurse Staffing With Mortality Risk of Medicare Beneficiaries Hospitalized With Sepsis

Question

Is registered nurse workload associated with mortality among Medicare beneficiaries who are admitted to an acute care hospital with a diagnosis of sepsis?

Findings

In this cross-sectional study of 1958 acute care hospitals and 702 140 Medicare beneficiaries with a diagnosis of sepsis, an increase in registered nurse hours per patient day was associated with a 3% decrease in 60-day mortality in these older adults, a finding that was statistically significant.

Meaning

The study results suggest that the hours of care provided by registered nurses is likely associated with the outcomes of patients with a diagnosis of sepsis.

Importance

Sepsis is a major physiologic response to infection that if not managed properly can lead to multiorgan failure and death. The US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) requires that hospitals collect data on core sepsis measure Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) in an effort to promote the early recognition and treatment of sepsis. Despite implementation of the SEP-1 measure, sepsis-related mortality continues to challenge acute care hospitals nationwide.

Objective

To determine if registered nurse workload was associated with mortality in Medicare beneficiaries admitted to an acute care hospital with sepsis.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used 2018 data from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, CMS Hospital Compare, and Medicare claims on Medicare beneficiaries age 65 to 99 years with a primary diagnosis of sepsis that was present on admission to 1 of 1958 nonfederal, general acute care hospitals that had data on CMS SEP-1 scores and registered nurse workload (indicated by registered nurse hours per patient day [HPPD]). Patients with sepsis were identified based on 29 International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes. Data were analyzed throughout 2021.

Exposures

SEP-1 score and registered nurse staffing.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The patient outcome of interest was mortality within 60 days of admission. Hospital characteristics included number of beds, ownership, teaching status, technology status, rurality, and region. Patient characteristics included age, sex, transfer status, intensive care unit admission, palliative care, do-not-resuscitate order, and a series of 29 comorbid diseases based on the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index.

Results

In total, 702 140 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 78.2 [8.7] years; 360 804 women [51%]) had a diagnosis of sepsis. The mean SEP-1 score was 56.1, and registered nurse HPPD was 6.2. In a multivariable regression model, each additional registered nurse HPPD was associated with a 3% decrease in the odds of 60-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% CI 0.96-0.99) controlling for SEP-1 score and hospital and patient characteristics.

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of this cross-sectional study suggest that hospitals that provide more registered nurse hours of care could likely improve SEP-1 bundle compliance and decrease the likelihood of mortality in Medicare beneficiaries with sepsis.

Early fluid bolus in adults with sepsis in the emergency department: a systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative synthesis

Background

Early intravenous fluids for patients with sepsis presenting with hypoperfusion or shock in the emergency department remains one of the key recommendations of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines to reduce mortality. However, compliance with the recommendation remains poor. While several interventions have been implemented to improve early fluid administration as part of sepsis protocols, the extent to which they have improved compliance with fluid resuscitation is unknown. The factors associated with the lack of compliance are also poorly understood.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative review to investigate the effectiveness of interventions in emergency departments in improving compliance with early fluid administration and examine the non-interventional facilitators and barriers that may influence appropriate fluid administration in adults with sepsis. We searched MEDLINE Ovid/PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, and SCOPUS databases for studies of any design to April 2021. We synthesised results from the studies reporting effectiveness of interventions in a meta-analysis and conducted a narrative synthesis of studies reporting non-interventional factors.

Results

We included 31 studies out of the 825 unique articles identified in the systematic review of which 21 were included in the meta-analysis and 11 in the narrative synthesis. In meta-analysis, interventions were associated with a 47% improvement in the rate of compliance [(Random Effects (RE) Relative Risk (RR) = 1.47, 95% Confidence Interval (CI), 1.25–1.74, p-value < 0.01)]; an average 24 min reduction in the time to fluids [RE mean difference = − 24.11(95% CI − 14.09 to − 34.14 min, p value < 0.01)], and patients receiving an additional 575 mL fluids [RE mean difference = 575.40 (95% CI 202.28–1353.08, p value < 0.01)]. The compliance rate of early fluid administration reported in the studies included in the narrative synthesis is 48% [RR = 0.48 (95% CI 0.24–0.72)].

Conclusion

Performance improvement interventions improve compliance and time and volume of fluids administered to patients with sepsis in the emergency department. While patient-related factors such as advanced age, co-morbidities, cryptic shock were associated with poor compliance, important organisational factors such as inexperience of clinicians, overcrowding and inter-hospital transfers were also identified. A comprehensive understanding of the facilitators and barriers to early fluid administration is essential to design quality improvement projects.

PROSPERO Registration ID

CRD42021225417.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-021-00558-5.

Quality initiative to improve emergency department sepsis bundle compliance through utilisation of an electronic health record tool

Introduction

Sepsis is a common cause of emergency department (ED) presentation and hospital admission, accounting for a disproportionate number of deaths each year relative to its incidence. Sepsis outcomes have improved with increased recognition and treatment standards promoted by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign. Due to delay in recognition and other barriers, sepsis bundle compliance remains low nationally. We hypothesised that a targeted education intervention regarding use of an electronic health record (EHR) tool for identification and management of sepsis would lead to increased EHR tool utilisation and increased sepsis bundle compliance.

Methods

We created a multidisciplinary quality improvement team to provide training and feedback on EHR tool utilisation within our ED. A prospective evaluation of the rate of EHR tool utilisation was monitored from June through December 2020. Simultaneously, we conducted two retrospective cohort studies comparing overall sepsis bundle compliance for patients when EHR tool was used versus not used. The first cohort was all patients with intention-to-treat for any sepsis severity. The second cohort of patients included adult patients with time of recognition of sepsis in the ED admitted with a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock.

Results

EHR tool utilisation increased from 23.3% baseline prior to intervention to 87.2% during the study. In the intention-to-treat cohort, there was a statistically significant difference in compliance between EHR tool utilisation versus no utilisation in overall bundle compliance (p<0.001) and for several individual components: initial lactate (p=0.009), repeat lactate (p=0.001), timely antibiotics (p=0.031), blood cultures before antibiotics (p=0.001), initial fluid bolus (p<0.001) and fluid reassessment (p<0.001). In the severe sepsis and septic shock cohort, EHR tool use increased from 71.2% pre-intervention to 85.0% post-intervention (p=0.008).

Conclusion

With training, feedback and EHR optimisation, an EHR tool can be successfully integrated into current workflows and appears to increase sepsis bundle compliance.

The Knowledge of Nursing Internship Program Students about Early Detection of Sepsis

Background: Sepsis is a life-threatening condition due to the failure of the body’s regulation of infection. Knowledge deficit is one of the barriers to early detection and initiation of sepsis care. Nursing internship program students as future nurses need to have sufficient knowledge about early detection of sepsis to support their behavior. Thus, the purpose of this study was to describe the knowledge of nursing internship program students regarding the early detection of sepsis and the demographic factor related to the knowledge.      Methods: The study design was a quantitative study. Through the proportionate stratified non-random sampling technique, the researcher involved 143 nursing internship program students of Universitas Padjadjaran. Data collection used a questionnaire based on the Sepsis-3 guidelines to measure nursing internship program students’ knowledge about early detection of sepsis. The data was carried out in July-August 2021.   Results: The average knowledge score of the respondents was 70.4 (SD=11.9). More than half of the respondents (56.6%) got a score below the average. Almost all respondents do not know the current definition of sepsis and still use the SIRS definition as clinical criteria for sepsis. However, respondents could identify clinical criteria for sepsis based on qSOFA and analyse sepsis indicators based on case scenarios. Meanwhile, based on its characteristics, the information is a factor that significantly affects the knowledge score (p < 0.05).          Conclusion: In conclusion, there is still a gap in the knowledge of the nursing internship program students regarding the update of the Sepsis-3 guidelines. Besides, information is identified as the factor that influences knowledge. Therefore, it suggested that the institution provide further effective educational methods to update students’ knowledge about the early detection of sepsis.

Improving Antibiotic Administration Rate for Patients With Sepsis in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated that delayed antibiotic administration increases the risk of mortality in patients with sepsis.

LOCAL PROBLEM

In the emergency department, the antibiotic administration rate within 1 and 3 hours for patients with suspected sepsis was low.

METHODS/INTERVENTIONS

We implemented an educational intervention with the nursing staff, which included training sessions and feedback, to ensure early detection and management of patients with suspected sepsis. Antibiotic administration rates were compared before and after education.

RESULTS

A total of 503 patients were included. The antibiotic administration rate improved as the phases continued (1 hour: from 5.2% to 15.6%, P = .004; 3 hours: from 35.6% to 49.7%, P = .04; 6 hours: from 74.1% to 89.1%, P = .002). The time to initial antibiotic administration also improved from 229 to 185 minutes (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Nurse-initiated quality improvement improved the early administration of antibiotics for patients with suspected sepsis.

Sepsis knowledge, skills and attitudes among ward-based nurses

BACKGROUND

Nurses are in a prime position to identify sepsis early by screening patients for sepsis, a skill that should be embedded into their daily practice. However, compliance with the sepsis bundle remains low.

AIMS

To explore the effects of sepsis training on knowledge, skills and attitude among ward-based nurses.

METHODS

Registered nurses from 16 acute surgical and medical wards were invited to anonymously complete a questionnaire.

FINDINGS

Response rate was 39% (98/250). Nurses with sepsis training had better knowledge of the National Early Warning Score 2 for sepsis screening, and the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, demonstrated a more positive attitude towards sepsis screening and management, were more confident in screening patients for sepsis and more likely to have screened a patient for sepsis.

CONCLUSIONS

Sepsis training improves nurses' attitudes, knowledge and confidence with regards to sepsis screening and management, resulting in adherence to evidence-based care, and should become mandatory for all clinical staff.

A mixed-methods feasibility study to assess the acceptability and applicability of immersive virtual reality sepsis game as an adjunct to nursing education

BACKGROUND

Virtual Reality (VR) simulation has been a topic of interest in recent years as an innovative strategy for healthcare education. Although there are a handful of studies evaluating VR simulation on knowledge, motivation, and satisfaction; there is a paucity of evidence to evaluate the effectiveness, acceptability and usability of 'Immersive' VR (IVR) simulation in nursing students.

OBJECTIVES

A two-stage sequential mixed-methods feasibility study underpinned by gaming theory investigated; (1) the impact of IVR sepsis game on pre-registration nurses' self-efficacy and, (2) their perceptions of the acceptability and applicability of IVR sepsis game as an adjunct to nursing simulation education.

METHODS

The IVR simulation intervention was designed in collaboration with serious game specialists. Stage one collated pre and post-intervention self-efficacy scores with 19 pre-registration nurses using the validated instrument, Nursing Anxiety and Self-Confidence with Clinical Decision Making (NASC-CDM©) scale. Stage two used a descriptive qualitative approach to explore student nurses' perceptions of the game.

RESULTS

In stage one, pre and post-test scores revealed significant increase in self-confidence (26.1%, P < 0.001) and a significant decrease in anxiety (23.4%, P < 0.001). Stage two qualitative responses revealed four over-arching themes: acceptability, applicability, areas of improvement of IVR sepsis game and limitations of IVR game.

CONCLUSION

IVR simulation show promise as an adjunct for nurse simulation and it appears to increase self-efficacy in pre-registration nursing students. Further testing with a sufficiently powered sample size will ratify findings and provide effective solutions to distance and online learning.

Time to administration of antibiotics and mortality in sepsis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between delay of antibiotic treatment and 28-day mortality in a study of septic patients identified by the Sepsis-3 criteria.

METHODS

A prospective observational cohort study of patients (≥ 18 years) with sepsis admitted to a Danish emergency department between October 2017 and March 2018. The interval between arrival to the ED and first delivery of antibiotics was used as time to antibiotic treatment (TTA). Logistic regression was used in the analysis of the association between TTA and mortality adjusted for potential confounding.

RESULTS

A total of 590 patients, median age 74.2 years, were included. Overall 28-day mortality was 14.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.8-17.7). Median TTA was 4.7 hours (interquartile range 2.7-8.1). The mortality in patients with TTA ≤1 hour was 26.5% (95% CI, 12.8-44.4), and 15.3% (95% CI, 9.8-22.5), 10.5% (95% CI, 6.6-15.8), and 12.8 (95% CI, 7.3-20.1) in the timespans 1-3, 3-6, and 6-9 hours, respectively, and 18.8% (95% CI, 12.0-27.2) in patients with TTA >9 hours. With patients with lowest mortality (TTA timespan 3-6 hours) as reference, the adjusted odds ratio of mortality was 4.53 (95% CI, 1.67-3.37) in patients with TTA ≤1 hour, 1.67 (95% CI, 0.83-3.37) in TTA timespan 1-3 hours, 1.17 (95% CI, 0.56-2.49) in timespan 6-9 hours, and 1.91 (95% CI, 0.96-3.85) in patient with TTA >9 hours.

CONCLUSIONS

The adjusted odds of 28-day mortality were lowest in emergency department (ED) patients with sepsis who received antibiotics between 1 and 9 hours and highest in patients treated within 1 and >9 hours after admission to the ED.

Normothermia in Patients With Sepsis Who Present to Emergency Departments Is Associated With Low Compliance With Sepsis Bundles and Increased In-Hospital Mortality Rate

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the impact of normothermia on compliance with sepsis bundles and in-hospital mortality in patients with sepsis who present to emergency departments.

DESIGN

Retrospective multicenter observational study.

PATIENTS

Nineteen university-affiliated hospitals of the Korean Sepsis Alliance participated in this study. Data were collected regarding patients who visited emergency departments for sepsis during the 1-month period. The patients were divided into three groups based on their body temperature at the time of triage in the emergency department (i.e., hypothermia [< 36°C] vs normothermia [36-38°C] vs hyperthermia [> 38°C]).

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Of 64,021 patients who visited emergency departments, 689 with community-acquired sepsis were analyzed (182 hyperthermic, 420 normothermic, and 87 hypothermic patients). The rate of compliance with the total hour-1 bundle was lowest in the normothermia group (6.0% vs 9.3% in hyperthermia vs 13.8% in hypothermia group; p = 0.032), the rate for lactate measurement was lowest in the normothermia group (62.1% vs 73.1% vs 75.9%; p = 0.005), and the blood culture rate was significantly lower in the normothermia than in the hyperthermia group (p < 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rates in the hyperthermia, normothermia, and hypothermia groups were 8.5%, 20.6%, and 30.8%, respectively (p < 0.001), but there was no significant association between compliance with sepsis bundles and in-hospital mortality. However, in a multivariate analysis, compared with hyperthermia, normothermia was significantly associated with an increased in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 2.472; 95% CI, 1.005-6.080). This association remained significant even after stratifying patients by median lactate level.

CONCLUSIONS

Normothermia at emergency department triage was significantly associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality and a lower rate of compliance with the sepsis bundle. Despite several limitations, our findings suggest a need for new strategies to improve sepsis outcomes in this group of patients.

Perceived roles and barriers to nurses' engagement in antimicrobial stewardship: A Thai qualitative case study

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial stewardship is the practice of ensuring the optimal use of antibiotics to prevent antimicrobial resistance. A multidisciplinary approach is considered best practice; however, little is known about nurses' contribution.

OBJECTIVES

To explore how organisational multidisciplinary leaders and clinical nurses perceive nurses' roles in AMS in a single organisational site case study based in Thailand, within the current governance, educational and practice context, and the barriers to nurses' engagement in AMS.

METHODS

A qualitative descriptive study using thematic analysis approach was conducted in a 1000-bed university hospital in Bangkok, Thailand. The combined number of organisational leaders and nurses was 33 including 15 individual organisational leader interviews and three focus groups involving 18 nurses.

RESULTS

Nurses currently participate in AMS by supporting system processes, monitoring safety and optimal antibiotic use and patient education. A lack of clear articulation of nurses' role and traditional professional hierarchies limits active participation. Inconsistent engagement was perceived as due to a failure to prioritise AMS activities, a lack of formal policies and a need for further education.

CONCLUSION

Nurses do engage in AMS but there are significant governance, hierarchical and educational impediments. These gaps need to be addressed before clearly defined nurse roles in AMS can be developed and embedded into clinical practice.

Implementation of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign one-hour bundle in a short stay unit: A quality improvement project

OBJECTIVE

To improve timely sepsis care by implementing the 2018 Surviving Sepsis Campaign one-hour interventions.

DESIGN

Ten-month prospective quality improvement project.

SETTING

A 38-bed short stay unit within an 800-bed hospital in New York City.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients admitted to the short stay unit who screened positive for sepsis.

INTERVENTION

A sepsis implementation tool was created from the 2018 Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines. Sepsis champions delivered education on sepsis recognition, treatment, and management, and the sepsis implementation tool to the healthcare staff.

PROCESS AND OUTCOME MEASURES

Time to first lactate, blood cultures × 2, antibiotic administration, length of stay and mortality were tracked weekly for five months.

RESULTS

From May 6, 2019 to October 1, 2019, 32 patients were diagnosed with sepsis. Initial lactate and blood cultures were completed on every patient within 1one-hour of sepsis diagnosis. Administration of antibiotics within one-hour reached 100% after week four and was sustained.

CONCLUSION

Use of a registered nurse-initiated sepsis implementation tool in a short stay unit led to the completion of blood cultures, initial lactate, and antibiotic administration within one-hour. Key factors to support this practice improvement were increasing registered nurse, physician and physician assistant sepsis knowledge, registered nurse and physician/physician assistant early collaboration, increased staffing and intravenous access equipment.

State Laws and Regulations Addressing Nurse-Initiated Protocols and Use of Nurse-Initiated Protocols in Emergency Departments: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study

INTRODUCTION

State regulations may impede the use of nurse-initiated protocols to begin life-saving treatments when patients arrive to the emergency department. In crowding and small-scale disaster events, this could translate to life and death practice differences. Nevertheless, research demonstrates nurses do utilize nurse-initiated protocols despite legal prohibitions. The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship of the state regulatory environment as expressed in nurse practice acts and interpretive statements prohibiting the use of nurse-initiated protocols with hospital use of nurse-initiated protocols in emergency departments.

METHODS

A cross-sectional approach was used with a nationwide survey. The independent variable categorized the location of the hospital in states that have a protocol prohibition. Outcomes included protocols for blood laboratory tests, X-rays, over-the-counter medication, and electrocardiograms. A second analysis was completed with New York State alone because this state has the strongest language prohibiting nurse-initiated protocols.

RESULTS

A total of 350 participants returned surveys from 48 states and the District of Columbia. A hospital was more likely to have policies supporting nurse-initiated protocols if they were not in a state with the scope of practice prohibitions. Four categories emerged such as advantages, approval, prohibition, and conditions under which the protocols can be used. Prohibitive language was associated with less protocol use for emergency care.

CONCLUSION

State scope of practice inconsistencies create misalignment with emergency nurse education and training, which may impede timely care and contribute to inequalities and inefficiencies in emergency care. In addition, prohibitive language places practicing nurses responding to emergencies in crowded work environments at risk.

Developing Adult Sepsis Protocol to Reduce the Time to Initial Antibiotic Dose and Improve Outcomes among Patients with Cancer in Emergency Department

Objective:

Sepsis is a common cause of noncancer-related deaths among oncology patients. Delay in the initiation of efficient antimicrobial therapy will decrease the survival rate. This study aims to develop a sepsis protocol for adult oncology patients to decrease the time needed to receive the initial dose of antibiotic in an emergency department (ED), improve the early recognition of sepsis, and decrease the in-hospital mortality rate due to sepsis.

Methods:

A quasi-experimental research design was used. A total of 168 participants were assigned into pre- and post-intervention groups (n = 85) and (n = 83), respectively. The quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment screening tool was used to screen patients in the triage room.

Results:

There was a significant difference in the proportions of receiving the initial antibiotic dose whether ≤1 h or >1 h between pre- and post-intervention groups. The results also showed that 89.4% of the postintervention group received their initial antibiotic dose in <1 h compared with 10.8% of the preintervention group. The median time needed for administering the initial antibiotic dose was decreased from 95 min to 45 min. The results of the changes in mortality rates are promising as it decreased 11.7% after applying the adult sepsis protocol.

Conclusions:

Applying an adult sepsis protocol in the ED significantly decreased the time needed to initiate antibiotic treatment. It is recommended to utilize a multidisciplinary and systematic approach in screening and treating sepsis.

Improving timely sepsis care using the surviving sepsis campaign one-hour bundle in a rural emergency department

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is deadly when not recognized and treated in a timely manner and leads to 270,000 deaths each year in America. Mortality increases eight percent for each hour treatment is delayed. Sepsis-related admission is the most expensive condition in the United States with a median cost per patient of $32,421.

LOCAL PROBLEM

Baseline data for patients with sepsis revealed that only 30% were recognized in triage, only 20% received correct amounts of fluids, and only 45% received antibiotics within one hour. The aim of this project was to improve timely sepsis care to 75% for patients in a rural emergency department within 90 days.

METHODS

A rapid cycle quality improvement project was completed, consisting of four plan-do-study-act cycles over 90 days. Each cycle included tests of change related to team and patient engagement, screening, and the use of timely sepsis orders. Data were collected three times weekly and analyzed using run charts.

INTERVENTIONS

Interventions included screening in triage with positively screened patients receiving participatory education, team handoff communication, a sepsis checklist for nurse-driven orders, and Power Hour for timely care.

RESULTS

Team communication improved to 83%. Patient education exceeded goal, with 100% of patients taking an active role in care. Sepsis screening improved to 100%. The recommended One-Hour Bundle for timely sepsis treatment improved to 83%.

CONCLUSION

The project was successful in improving patient and team engagement, screening, and sepsis care within 1 hour for emergency department patients.

Supply Chain Delays in Antimicrobial Administration After the Initial Clinician Order and Mortality in Patients With Sepsis

OBJECTIVES

There is mounting evidence that delays in appropriate antimicrobial administration are responsible for preventable deaths in patients with sepsis. Herein, we examine the association between potentially modifiable antimicrobial administration delays, measured by the time from the first order to the first administration (antimicrobial lead time), and death among people who present with new onset of sepsis.

DESIGN

Observational cohort and case-control study.

SETTING

The emergency department of an academic, tertiary referral center during a 3.5-year period.

PATIENTS

Adult patients with new onset of sepsis or septic shock.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We enrolled 4,429 consecutive patients who presented to the emergency department with a new diagnosis of sepsis. We defined 0-1 hour as the gold standard antimicrobial lead time for comparison. Fifty percent of patients had an antimicrobial lead time of more than 1.3 hours. For an antimicrobial lead time of 1-2 hours, the adjusted odds ratio of death at 28 days was 1.28 (95% CI, 1.07-1.54; p = 0.007); for an antimicrobial lead time of 2-3 hours was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.85-1.36; p = 0.6); for an antimicrobial lead time of 3-6 hours was 1.57 (95% CI, 1.26-1.95; p < 0.001); for an antimicrobial lead time of 6-12 hours was 1.36 (95% CI, 0.99-1.86; p = 0.06); and for an antimicrobial lead time of more than 12 hours was 1.85 (95% CI, 1.29-2.65; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Delays in the first antimicrobial execution, after the initial clinician assessment and first antimicrobial order, are frequent and detrimental. Biases inherent to the retrospective nature of the study apply. Known biologic mechanisms support these findings, which also demonstrate a dose-response effect. In contrast to the elusive nature of sepsis onset and sepsis onset recognition, antimicrobial lead time is an objective, measurable, and modifiable process.

Adherence to the SEP-1 Sepsis Bundle in Hospital-Onset v. Community-Onset Sepsis: a Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

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.

Early, Nurse-Directed Sepsis Care

: Background: Sepsis is one of the leading causes of hospital mortality and readmission. For the past 20 years, sepsis research has focused on best practices for treating patients with the most severe manifestations of sepsis, while the treatment of patients outside of critical care or ED settings, who have early or less severe signs and symptoms of sepsis, have received little attention.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this quality improvement (QI) initiative was to promote early recognition and treatment of sepsis through the establishment of a multidisciplinary, executive-led sepsis guiding team that leveraged nursing skills and expertise.

METHODS

To meet this objective, we decided to speed the initiation of sepsis treatment at our medical center, going beyond the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines in place at the time and setting as targets the identification and treatment within one hour of all inpatients and ED patients with suspected sepsis, regardless of their illness severity or care unit. Our early intervention strategy incorporated a nurse-directed ED Code Sepsis, based on the characterization of sepsis as a systemic inflammatory response syndrome-a criterion widely used at the start of this QI initiative-and an inpatient Power Hour, which authorized nurses to initiate order sets independently for lactate levels, blood cultures, and fluid boluses when they suspected sepsis. The order sets both improved bundle adherence and signaled the pharmacy to expedite antibiotic preparation and delivery. To gauge the effects of our initiative, we conducted a retrospective, interrupted time-series cohort evaluation, using the in-hospital sepsis-related mortality rate as the primary outcome, and considered as process metrics the initiation of ED Code Sepsis and the inpatient Power Hour, order set use, bundle adherence, and sepsis-related rapid response team (RRT) calls.

RESULTS

Over the course of the seven-year pre- to postintervention evaluation period, ED sepsis bundle adherence increased from 40.5% to 73.7% (P < 0.001), with a mean triage to antibiotic time of 80 minutes. Sepsis-related RRT calls decreased from 2.2% to 0.85% (P < 0.001). And the in-hospital sepsis-related mortality rate dropped from 12.5% to 8.4% (P < 0.001) with an absolute reduction of 4.5 deaths per 100 sepsisrelated discharges.

CONCLUSION

This project demonstrates that using nurse-directed care to promote timely identification and early treatment of sepsis in the ED and in inpatient settings can improve bundle adherence and reduce in-hospital sepsis-related mortality rates.

Antibiotic- and Fluid-Focused Bundles Potentially Improve Sepsis Management, but High-Quality Evidence Is Lacking for the Specificity Required in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service's Sepsis Bundle (SEP-1)

OBJECTIVE

To address three controversial components in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service's sepsis bundle for performance measure (SEP-1): antibiotics within 3 hours, a 30 mL/kg fluid infusion for all hypotensive patients, and repeat lactate measurements within 6 hours if initially elevated. We hypothesized that antibiotic- and fluid-focused bundles like SEP-1 would probably show benefit, but evidence supporting specific antibiotic timing, fluid dosing, or serial lactate requirements would not be concordant. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of studies of sepsis bundles like SEP-1.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov through March 15, 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies comparing survival in septic adults receiving versus not receiving antibiotic- and fluid-focused bundles.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two investigators (D.J.P., P.Q.E.).

DATA SYNTHESIS

Seventeen observational studies (11,303 controls and 4,977 bundle subjects) met inclusion criteria. Bundles were associated with increased odds ratios of survival (odds ratio [95% CI]) in 15 studies with substantial heterogeneity (I = 61%; p < 0.01). Survival benefits were consistent in the five largest (1,697-12,486 patients per study) (1.20 [1.11-1.30]; I = 0%) and six medium-sized studies (167-1,029) (2.03 [1.52-2.71]; I = 8%) but not the six smallest (64-137) (1.25 [0.42-3.66]; I = 57%). Bundles were associated with similarly increased survival benefits whether requiring antibiotics within 1 hour (n = 7 studies) versus 3 hours (n = 8) versus no specified time (n = 2); or 30 mL/kg fluid (n = 7) versus another volume (≥ 2 L, n = 1; ≥ 20 mL/kg, n = 2; 1.5-2 L or 500 mL, n = 1 each; none specified, n = 4) (p = 0.19 for each comparison). In the only study employing serial lactate measurements, survival was not increased versus others. No study had a low risk of bias or assessed potential adverse bundle effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Available studies support the notion that antibiotic- and fluid-focused sepsis bundles like SEP-1 improve survival but do not demonstrate the superiority of any specific antibiotic time or fluid volume or of serial lactate measurements. Until strong reproducible evidence demonstrates the safety and benefit of any fixed requirement for these interventions, the present findings support the revision of SEP-1 to allow flexibility in treatment according to physician judgment.

Delay Within the 3-Hour Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guideline on Mortality for Patients With Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock

OBJECTIVES

To specify when delays of specific 3-hour bundle Surviving Sepsis Campaign guideline recommendations applied to severe sepsis or septic shock become harmful and impact mortality.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

One health system composed of six hospitals and 45 clinics in a Midwest state from January 01, 2011, to July 31, 2015.

PATIENTS

All adult patients hospitalized with billing diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock.

INTERVENTIONS

Four 3-hour Surviving Sepsis Campaign guideline recommendations: 1) obtain blood culture before antibiotics, 2) obtain lactate level, 3) administer broad-spectrum antibiotics, and 4) administer 30 mL/kg of crystalloid fluid for hypotension (defined as "mean arterial pressure" < 65) or lactate (> 4).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

To determine the effect of t minutes of delay in carrying out each intervention, propensity score matching of "baseline" characteristics compensated for differences in health status. The average treatment effect in the treated computed as the average difference in outcomes between those treated after shorter versus longer delay. To estimate the uncertainty associated with the average treatment effect in the treated metric and to construct 95% CIs, bootstrap estimation with 1,000 replications was performed. From 5,072 patients with severe sepsis or septic shock, 1,412 (27.8%) had in-hospital mortality. The majority of patients had the four 3-hour bundle recommendations initiated within 3 hours. The statistically significant time in minutes after which a delay increased the risk of death for each recommendation was as follows: lactate, 20.0 minutes; blood culture, 50.0 minutes; crystalloids, 100.0 minutes; and antibiotic therapy, 125.0 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

The guideline recommendations showed that shorter delays indicates better outcomes. There was no evidence that 3 hours is safe; even very short delays adversely impact outcomes. Findings demonstrated a new approach to incorporate time t when analyzing the impact on outcomes and provide new evidence for clinical practice and research.

Improving 3-Hour Sepsis Bundled Care Outcomes: Implementation of a Nurse-Driven Sepsis Protocol in the Emergency Department

PROBLEM

Sepsis, a life-threatening condition, can rapidly progress to death. The Hospital Inpatient Quality Reporting program has implemented bundled care metrics for sepsis care, but timely completion of these interventions is challenging. Best-practice interventions could improve patient outcomes and reimbursement. The purpose of this project was to improve the timeliness of sepsis recognition and implementation of bundled care interventions in the emergency department.

METHODS

This evidence-based practice improvement project implemented a Detect, Act, Reassess, Titrate (DART)-based nursing protocol embedded within a checklist communication tool in the emergency department of a tertiary level-2 trauma center. Data comparisons between preintervention and post-DART protocol/checklist implementation included compliance with the individual Inpatient Quality Reporting 3-hour bundled elements, number of hospital days, and time to screen. Staff also completed a survey designed to assess their satisfaction with the DART algorithm/checklist. The Pearson χ² test was used to assess bundled-care intervention variables. Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to explore hospitalization outcomes. Staff satisfaction survey results were summarized.

RESULTS

Improvement was statistically significant for lactate levels, blood cultures, and early antibiotic administration in the intervention period compared with baseline. Time to screen, ED length of stay, and number of hospital days improved between baseline and the intervention period, with an average number of hospital days decreasing by 2.5 days. Compliance with all Inpatient Quality Reporting metrics increased from 30% to 80%.

DISCUSSION

When the nurse-driven protocol and communication tool were implemented, compliance with time-sensitive sepsis bundled interventions improved significantly. The outcomes suggest nurse-driven protocols can improve sepsis outcomes.

Sepsis now a priority: a quality improvement initiative for early sepsis recognition and care

Objective

To develop a triage-based screening algorithm and treatment order-sets aimed at improving the quality of care of all patients with sepsis presenting to our emergency department (ED).

Design

Retrospective cohort study conducted during a pre-intervention period from 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2011 and a post-intervention period from 1 September 2014 to 30 April 2015.

Setting

A large teaching hospital located in Toronto, Ontario, Canada with a 35-bed ED.

Participants

All patients meeting pre-specified sepsis criteria during the ED encounter.

Main Outcome Measures

Process of care measures included time to assessment by emergency physician, lactate measurement, blood culture collection, fluid and antibiotic administration. Intensive care unit (ICU) outcomes including admissions, length of stay (LOS) and deaths were reviewed.

Results

There were 346 patients pre-intervention, and 270 patients post-intervention. We significantly improved all process measures including mean time to antibiotics by 60 min (P = 0.003) and proportion of patients receiving fluid resuscitation (64.7% vs. 94.4%, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the number of patients admitted to ICU (P = 0.14). The median ICU LOS was shorter in the post-intervention group [2.0 days (interquartile range (IQR) 1.0-4.5 days) vs. 5.0 days (IQR 1.5-10.8 days), P = 0.04], and there was no difference in in-hospital mortality between groups (P = 0.27).

Conclusions

We have demonstrated that a triage-based sepsis screening tool results in expedited and consistent delivery of care, with a significant improvement in initial resuscitation measures.

A survey of sepsis knowledge among Canadian emergency department registered nurses

BACKGROUND

With the rise of patients with sepsis presenting to emergency departments, emergency nurses, as frontline healthcare workers, require current clinical knowledge of sepsis. The aim of this study was to assess emergency department registered nurses' knowledge of sepsis and their perspectives of caring for patients with sepsis.

METHODS

A descriptive cross-sectional survey was used to survey Registered Nurses from four emergency departments in a western Canadian city (N=312).

RESULTS

The majority of nurses scored poorly on questions examining knowledge of systemic inflammatory response syndrome variables associated with sepsis, and sepsis definitions, general knowledge, and treatment (mean score 51.8%). Nurses acknowledged their lack of knowledge and indicated a desire for further sepsis education. Challenges in providing sepsis-related care concerned perceived heavy workloads and clinical implications related to the patient's status.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational programs and coaching approaches that maximize nurses' abilities to enhance their decision-making with regards to early assessment and appropriate intervention for persons with sepsis are needed. Such multifaceted approaches would acknowledge nurses' existing knowledge and provide practical supports to help nurses extend and mobilize their knowledge for everyday decision-making within the complex clinical environment of the emergency department.

Sepsis Screening: Combining Early Warning Scores and SIRS Criteria

Providing effective screening tools to nurses is necessary to improve patient outcomes and health care quality. This research examines if the modification of two electronic health record sepsis screening tools using a combined systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), modified early warning score (MEWS), and national early warning score (NEWS) criteria improves the recognition of sepsis by nurses. Medical-surgical/telemetry units at a medical center in the Midwest were examined using a quasiexperimental design. Modifications of tool 1 captured 18% more correct classifications of sepsis (odds ratio [OR] = .82, 95% CI = [0.68, 0.98]), triggering for 10% fewer patients, t(1033) = 9.31, p < .001. 95% CI = [0.078, 0.119]. Modifications of tool 2 captured 3 times more correct alerts (OR = .29, 95% CI = [0.24, 0.35]), triggering for 46% fewer patients, t(1033) = 24.38, p < .001. 95% CI = [0.420, 0.493]. The updated criteria showed significant improvement toward correctly identifying sepsis and presents the opportunity to develop an effective tool that balances sensitivity with specificity.

Are nurses updated on the proper management of patients with sepsis?

Abstract Objective: To evaluate nurses' knowledge about the definitions of Sepsis-3 and updates to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign. Methods: This descriptive study was carried out from July to August 2018, with 30 nurses from four wards of a large university hospital. For data collection, we created, structured, and validated a questionnaire composed of socio-demographic/occupational data and knowledge test. Results: Only 16.6% of the professionals received in-service training on the subject. There was no implementation of sepsis protocols in the institution, although 96.6% of the participants considered their implementation necessary. Professionals aged ≥35 years old had a higher level of knowledge about the new definition of sepsis (p=0.042). The knowledge about volume resuscitation (p=0.001) and use of vasopressors (p=0.025) was greater in those with ≥10.5 years of experience in the profession. Nurses from the clinical units presented a higher level of knowledge about the organic dysfunctions caused by sepsis (p=0.025). Conclusion and implications for the practice: Nurses do not have satisfactory knowledge for the proper identification, treatment, and clinical management of sepsis. There is a need for greater professional, institutional, and political incentives to implement a permanent education and the sepsis protocol.

Implementation of a whole of hospital sepsis clinical pathway in a cancer hospital: impact on sepsis management, outcomes and costs

Infection and sepsis are common problems in cancer management affecting up to 45% of patients and are associated with significant morbidity, mortality and healthcare utilisation.

Objective

To develop and implement a whole of hospital clinical pathway for the management of sepsis (SP) in a specialised cancer hospital and to measure the impact on patient outcomes and healthcare utilisation.

Methods

A multidisciplinary sepsis working party was established. Process mapping of practices for recognition and management of sepsis was undertaken across all clinical areas. A clinical pathway document that supported nurse-initiated sepsis care, prompt antibiotic and fluid resuscitation was implemented. Process and outcome measures for patients with sepsis were collected preimplementation (April-December 2012), postimplementation cohorts (April-December 2013), and from January to December 2014.

Results

323 patients were evaluated (111 preimplementation, 212 postimplementation). More patients with sepsis had lactate measured (75.0% vs 17.2%) and appropriate first dose antibiotic (90.1% vs 76.1%) (all p<0.05). Time to antibiotics was halved (55 vs 110 min, p<0.05). Patients with sepsis had lower rates of intensive care unit admission (17.1% vs 35.5%), postsepsis length of stay (7.5 vs 9.9 days), and sepsis-related mortality (5.0% vs 16.2%) (all p<0.05). Mean total hospital admission costs were lower in the SP cohort, with a significant difference in admission costs between historical and SP non-surgical groups of $A8363 (95% CI 81.02 to 16645.32, p=0.048) per patient on the pathway. A second cohort of 449 patients with sepsis from January to December 2014 demonstrated sustained improvement.

Conclusions

The SP was associated with significant improvement in patient outcomes and reduced costs. The SP has been sustained since 2013, and has been successfully implemented in another hospital with further implementations underway in Victoria.

[Standing Orders and Quality of Care at Triage in Emergency Services: Integrative Review]

INTRODUCTION

Overcrowding of emergency services is a widespread problem in western countries. This situation results in negative patient outcomes and influences the quality of care. Standing orders are a possible way to improve the quality and performance of the health system. The aim of this article is to identify, based on a review of the literature, the effects of standing orders initiated by triage nurses in emergency services on the quality of care.

METHODS

The quality of care dimensions of the Institute of Medicine (2001) were used as a frame of reference. The integrative review was performed on a selection of articles from Cochrane, CINALH, EMBASE, Medline, PubMed and Google Scholar. A total of 23 articles were selected and analysed.

RESULTS

The integrative review documented the effects of standing orders initiated by triage nurses on the six dimensions of quality of care: effectiveness, patient-centeredness, efficiency, timeliness, safety and equity. Standing orders are able to improve the efficiency of care by reducing, among other things, the time to treatment and diagnostic tests. They also reduce the length of stay of patients in emergency services.

CONCLUSION

Standing orders initiated by triage nurses in emergency services can have positive effects on the quality of care provided to the patient. Further research with more robust study designs is needed.

Impact of a Combination Antibiotic Bag on Compliance With Surviving Sepsis Campaign Goals in Emergency Department Patients With Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock

BACKGROUND

Severe sepsis and septic shock represent common presentations in the emergency department (ED) and have high rates of mortality. Guideline-recommended goals of care have been shown to benefit these patients, but can be difficult to provide.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the use of a premixed bag consisting of 2 g cefepime and 1 g vancomycin in 1000 mL of normal saline increases the probability of patients receiving Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) recommendations for the initiation of antimicrobials and fluid challenge.

METHODS

This was a 6-month retrospective analysis conducted to determine the impact of an intervention on time to antimicrobials and fluid administration in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. Patients presenting to the ED who received a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock and were administered 2 antibiotics were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome assessed was compliance with SSC recommendations for antibiotic and fluid goals within 3 hours of ED arrival.

RESULTS

A total of 160 patients were included. In the intervention group, 63.8% of patients met the primary outcome compared with 22.5% in the historical group (odds ratio = 2.32; 95% CI = 1.67-3.23). Time to administration of antibiotics was less with the combination antibiotic bag (CAB: median (IQR) = 72 (48-115) minutes; non-CAB: median (IQR) = 135 (102-244) minutes; P ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This intervention significantly increased the proportion of patients provided with SSC goals of care. Such interventions have not been reported previously and could be meaningful in the management of severe sepsis and septic shock.

The Timing of Early Antibiotics and Hospital Mortality in Sepsis

RATIONALE

Prior sepsis studies evaluating antibiotic timing have shown mixed results.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the association between antibiotic timing and mortality among patients with sepsis receiving antibiotics within 6 hours of emergency department registration.

METHODS

Retrospective study of 35,000 randomly selected inpatients with sepsis treated at 21 emergency departments between 2010 and 2013 in Northern California. The primary exposure was antibiotics given within 6 hours of emergency department registration. The primary outcome was adjusted in-hospital mortality. We used detailed physiologic data to quantify severity of illness within 1 hour of registration and logistic regression to estimate the odds of hospital mortality based on antibiotic timing and patient factors.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The median time to antibiotic administration was 2.1 hours (interquartile range, 1.4-3.1 h). The adjusted odds ratio for hospital mortality based on each hour of delay in antibiotics after registration was 1.09 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.13) for each elapsed hour between registration and antibiotic administration. The increase in absolute mortality associated with an hour's delay in antibiotic administration was 0.3% (95% CI, 0.01-0.6%; P = 0.04) for sepsis, 0.4% (95% CI, 0.1-0.8%; P = 0.02) for severe sepsis, and 1.8% (95% CI, 0.8-3.0%; P = 0.001) for shock.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large, contemporary, and multicenter sample of patients with sepsis in the emergency department, hourly delays in antibiotic administration were associated with increased odds of hospital mortality even among patients who received antibiotics within 6 hours. The odds increased within each sepsis severity strata, and the increased odds of mortality were greatest in septic shock.

Sepsis Early Alert Tool: Early recognition and timely management in the emergency department

INTRODUCTION

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines recommend administration of appropriate antibiotics within 1 h in patients with severe sepsis, with two sets of blood cultures taken prior to administration.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the effect of introducing a Sepsis Early Alert Tool (SEAT) in the ED. Outcomes were antibiotic timing, antibiotic choice and obtaining adequate blood cultures.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review compared consecutive severe sepsis presentations admitted to ICU via the ED during two equivalent 6 month periods before and after SEAT introduction.

RESULTS

The analyses included 55 patients before and 45 following SEAT introduction. The groups were similar in age, sex, triage category, sepsis source, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III scores and hospital mortality. The percentage receiving antibiotics within 60 min of triage increased from 24% (95% CI 13-37%) to 44% (95% CI 30-60%), P = 0.03. Median time from triage to first antibiotic was 105 (IQR 65-170) min and 85 (IQR 50-140) min before and after SEAT introduction, respectively, P = 0.15. Percentages receiving antibiotics within 60 min of first recognition of severe sepsis were 67% (95% CI 53-79%) and 71% (95% CI 56-84%) before and after SEAT introduction, P = 0.83. The percentage having two sets of blood cultures drawn prior to antibiotic administration increased from 18% (95% CI 9-34%) to 44% (95% CI 27-60%), P = 0.008. Appropriateness of antibiotics was 58% (95% CI 44-71%) and 75% (95% CI 60-87%) before and after SEAT implementation, P = 0.09.

CONCLUSION

The introduction of a SEAT in the ED is associated with earlier recognition of severe sepsis and improvements in quality of care.

Sepsis in Pregnancy: Identification and Management

Sepsis accounts for up to 28% of all maternal deaths. Prompt, appropriate treatment improves maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. To date, there are no validated tools for identification of sepsis in pregnant women, and tools used in the general population tend to overestimate mortality. Once identified, management of pregnancy-associated sepsis is goal-directed, but because of the lack of studies of sepsis management in pregnancy, it must be assumed that modifications need to be made on the basis of the physiologic changes of pregnancy. Key to management is early fluid resuscitation and early initiation of appropriate antimicrobial therapy directed toward the likely source of infection or, if the source is unknown, empiric broad-spectrum therapy. Efforts directed at identifying the source of infection and appropriate source control measures are critical. Development of an illness severity scoring system and treatment algorithms validated in pregnant women needs to be a research priority.

The Impact of Timing of Antibiotics on Outcomes in Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

We sought to systematically review and meta-analyze the available data on the association between timing of antibiotic administration and mortality in severe sepsis and septic shock.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive search criteria was performed using a predefined protocol.

STUDY SELECTION

INCLUSION CRITERIA

adult patients with severe sepsis or septic shock, reported time to antibiotic administration in relation to emergency department triage and/or shock recognition, and mortality.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

immunosuppressed populations, review article, editorial, or nonhuman studies.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers screened abstracts with a third reviewer arbitrating. The effect of time to antibiotic administration on mortality was based on current guideline recommendations: 1) administration within 3 hours of emergency department triage and 2) administration within 1 hour of severe sepsis/septic shock recognition. Odds ratios were calculated using a random effect model. The primary outcome was mortality.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 1,123 publications were identified and 11 were included in the analysis. Among the 11 included studies, 16,178 patients were evaluable for antibiotic administration from emergency department triage. Patients who received antibiotics more than 3 hours after emergency department triage (< 3 hr reference) had a pooled odds ratio for mortality of 1.16 (0.92-1.46; p = 0.21). A total of 11,017 patients were evaluable for antibiotic administration from severe sepsis/septic shock recognition. Patients who received antibiotics more than 1 hour after severe sepsis/shock recognition (< 1 hr reference) had a pooled odds ratio for mortality of 1.46 (0.89-2.40; p = 0.13). There was no increased mortality in the pooled odds ratios for each hourly delay from less than 1 to more than 5 hours in antibiotic administration from severe sepsis/shock recognition.

CONCLUSION

Using the available pooled data, we found no significant mortality benefit of administering antibiotics within 3 hours of emergency department triage or within 1 hour of shock recognition in severe sepsis and septic shock. These results suggest that currently recommended timing metrics as measures of quality of care are not supported by the available evidence.