Variation in the Contents of Sepsis Bundles and Quality Measures. A Systematic Review

Cellular host response sepsis test for risk stratification of patients in the emergency department: A pooled analysis

OBJECTIVES

Sepsis is one of the most common, costly, and misdiagnosed conditions in U.S. emergency departments (EDs). ED providers often treat on nonspecific signs, subjective suspicion, or presumption of infection, resulting in over- and undertreatment. An increased understanding of host response has opened a new direction for sepsis diagnostics. The IntelliSep test is a U.S. Food and Drug Administration-cleared cellular host response diagnostic that could help distinguish sepsis in ED settings. Our objective was to evaluate the potential of the cellular host response test to expedite appropriate care for patients who present with signs of infection.

METHODS

We performed a pooled analysis of five adult (≥18 years) cohorts enrolled at seven geographically diverse U.S. sites in separate studies. Structured blinded adjudication was used to classify presence or absence of sepsis, and only patients with high confidence in the adjudicated label were included (n = 1002), defined as patients for whom there was consensus in the determination of sepsis per the Sepsis-3 and severe sepsis per the Sepsis-2 definitions between both the independent adjudication panel and the site-level physician.

RESULTS

Among patients with signs or suspicion of infection, the test achieved similar or better performance compared to other indicators in identifying patients at high risk for sepsis (specificity > 83%) and significantly superior performance in identifying those at low risk (sensitivity > 92%; 0% sepsis-associated mortality). The test also stratified severity of illness, as shown by 30-day in-hospital mortality (p < 0.001), hospital length of stay (p < 0.01), and use of hospital resources (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that the cellular host response test provides clinically actionable results for patients at both high and low risk for sepsis and provides a rapid, objective means for risk stratification of patients with signs of infection. If integrated into standard of care, the test may help improve outcomes and reduce unnecessary antibiotic use.

Inpatient hospital performance is associated with post-discharge sepsis mortality

Background

Post-discharge deaths are common in patients hospitalized for sepsis, but the drivers of post-discharge deaths are unclear. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that hospitals with high risk-adjusted inpatient sepsis mortality also have high post-discharge mortality, readmissions, and discharge to nursing homes.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study of age-qualifying Medicare beneficiaries with sepsis hospitalization between January 2013 and December 2014. Hospital survivors were followed for 180-days post-discharge, and mortality, readmissions, and new admission to skilled nursing facility were measured. Inpatient hospital-specific sepsis risk-adjusted mortality ratio (observed: expected) was the primary exposure.

Results

A total of 830,721 patients in the cohort were hospitalized for sepsis, with inpatient mortality of 20% and 90-day mortality of 48%. Higher hospital-specific sepsis risk-adjusted mortality was associated with increased 90-day post-discharge mortality (aOR 1.03 per each 0.1 increase in hospital inpatient O:E ratio, 95% CI 1.03–1.04). Higher inpatient risk adjusted mortality was also associated with increased probability of being discharged to a nursing facility (aOR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02–1.03) and 90-day readmissions (aOR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02–1.03).

Conclusions

Hospitals with the highest risk-adjusted sepsis inpatient mortality also have higher post-discharge mortality and increased readmissions, suggesting that post-discharge complications are a modifiable risk that may be affected during inpatient care. Future work will seek to elucidate inpatient and healthcare practices that can reduce sepsis post-discharge complications.

Barriers and facilitators to the successful development, implementation and evaluation of care bundles in acute care in hospital: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Care bundles are small sets of evidence-based recommendations, designed to support the implementation of evidence-based best clinical practice. However, there is variation in the design and implementation of care bundles, which may impact on the fidelity of delivery and subsequently their clinical effectiveness.

METHODS

A scoping review was carried out using the Arksey and O'Malley framework to identify the literature reporting on the design, implementation and evaluation of care bundles. The Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane and Ovid MEDLINE databases were searched for manuscripts published between 2001 and November 2017; hand-searching of references and citations was also undertaken. Data were initially assessed using a quality assessment tool, the Downs and Black checklist, prior to further analysis and narrative synthesis. Implementation strategies were classified using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) criteria.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight thousand six hundred ninety-two publications were screened and 348 articles retrieved in full text. Ninety-nine peer-reviewed quantitative publications were included for data extraction. These consisted of one randomised crossover trial, one randomised cluster trial, one case-control study, 20 prospective cohort studies and 76 non-parallel cohort studies. Twenty-three percent of studies were classified as poor based on Downs and Black checklist, and reporting of implementation strategies lacked structure. Negative associations were found between the number of elements in a bundle and compliance (Spearman's rho = - 0.47, non-parallel cohort and - 0.65, prospective cohort studies), and between the complexity of elements and compliance (p < 0.001, chi-squared = 23.05). Implementation strategies associated with improved compliance included evaluative and iterative approaches, development of stakeholder relationships and education and training strategies.

CONCLUSION

Care bundles with a small number of simple elements have better compliance rates. Standardised reporting of implementation strategies may help to implement care bundles into clinical practice with high fidelity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This review was registered on the PROSPERO database: CRD 42015029963 in December 2015.

Risk factors and outcomes of afebrile bacteremia patients in an emergency department

OBJECTIVE

There is limited research on afebrile bacteremia. We aimed to compare the risk factors and outcomes of patients with afebrile and febrile infections.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of bloodstream isolates from 994 adults admitted to the emergency department of a university hospital. Afebrile infections, defined as the absence of fever history or measured fever through the emergency department course, was compared with febrile infection. Frequencies and proportions of sources of infection, comorbidities, along with organ failure and mortality were presented. The major outcome measure was 30-day survival. chi-Square or Student's t test was used for univariate analysis, and Cox proportional hazard model was used for multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

We found that the risk factors and outcomes of febrile and afebrile bacteremia patients were very different. The afebrile patients were older, have higher Charlson comorbidity index, and had poorer outcomes than the febrile patients. We also found that oldest old age, nonhematologic malignancy, necrotizing fasciitis, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and pneumonia were each positive independent predictors of afebrile bacteremia, whereas Escherichia coli infection and liver abscess were independent negative predictors of afebrile bacteremia. Finally, the 30-day all-cause mortality was higher in the afebrile group than in the febrile group (45% versus 12%, log-rank P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This series of patients with afebrile bacteremia confirmed the previously reported associations with old age and immunocompromised conditions. Clinicians should explore the possibility of occult severe infection, and initiate early hemodynamic support and empirical antimicrobial therapy for patients with the aforementioned risk factors.