Improving Sepsis Outcomes in the Era of Pay-for-Performance and Electronic Quality Measures: A Joint IDSA/ACEP/PIDS/SHEA/SHM/SIDP Position Paper.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced the Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) as a pay-for-reporting measure in 2015 and is now planning to make it a pay-for-performance measure by incorporating it into the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program. This joint IDSA/ACEP/PIDS/SHEA/SHM/SIPD position paper highlights concerns with this change. Multiple studies indicate that SEP-1 implementation was associated with increased broad-spectrum antibiotic use, lactate measurements, and aggressive fluid resuscitation for patients with suspected sepsis but not with decreased mortality rates. Increased focus on SEP-1 risks further diverting attention and resources from more effective measures and comprehensive sepsis care. We recommend retiring SEP-1 rather than using it in a payment model and shifting instead to new sepsis metrics that focus on patient outcomes. CMS is developing a community-onset sepsis 30-day mortality electronic clinical quality measure (eCQM) that is an important step in this direction. The eCQM preliminarily identifies sepsis using systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, antibiotic administrations or diagnosis codes for infection or sepsis, and clinical indicators of acute organ dysfunction. We support the eCQM but recommend removing SIRS criteria and diagnosis codes to streamline implementation, decrease variability between hospitals, maintain vigilance for patients with sepsis but without SIRS, and avoid promoting antibiotic use in uninfected patients with SIRS. We further advocate for CMS to harmonize the eCQM with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Adult Sepsis Event surveillance metric to promote unity in federal measures, decrease reporting burden for hospitals, and facilitate shared prevention initiatives. These steps will result in a more robust measure that will encourage hospitals to pay more attention to the full breadth of sepsis care, stimulate new innovations in diagnosis and treatment, and ultimately bring us closer to our shared goal of improving outcomes for patients.

The Association Between Time From Emergency Department Visit to ICU Admission and Mortality in Patients With Sepsis.

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines 2021 recommends that adult patients with sepsis requiring intensive care should be admitted to the ICU within 6 hours of their emergency department (ED) visits. However, there is limited evidence on whether 6 hours is the best target time for compliance with the sepsis bundle. We aimed to investigate the association between time from ED visits to ICU admission (i.e., ED length of stay [ED-LOS]) and mortality and identify the optimal ED-LOS for patients with sepsis. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care Emergency Department and Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV databases. PATIENTS: Adult patients (≥ 18 yr old) who were transferred from the ED to the ICU and subsequently diagnosed with sepsis based on the Sepsis-3 criteria within 24 hours of ICU admission. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 1,849 patients with sepsis, we found a disproportionally higher mortality rate in patients immediately admitted to the ICU (e.g., < 2 hr). When using ED-LOS as a continuous variable, ED-LOS was not significantly associated with 28-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [OR] per hour increase, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.96-1.13; p = 0.3) after an adjustment for potential confounders (e.g., demographics, triage vital signs, and laboratory results) in the multivariable analysis. However, when we categorized all patients into time quartiles (ED-LOS: < 3.3 hr, 3.3-4.5 hr, 4.6-6.1 hr, and > 6.1 hr), patients in the higher time quartiles (e.g., 3.3-4.5 hr) had higher 28-day mortality compared with those in the lowest time quartile (< 3.3 hr) (e.g., adjusted OR for patients in the second time quartile [3.3-4.5 hr] 1.59; 95% CI, 1.03-2.46; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Earlier admission to the ICU (e.g., within 3.3 hr of ED visits) was associated with lower 28-day mortality in patients with sepsis. Our findings suggest patients with sepsis who require intensive care may benefit from a more immediate ICU admission than 6 hours.

Clinical Impact of a Sepsis Alert System Plus Electronic Sepsis Navigator Using the Epic Sepsis Prediction Model in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: The Epic Sepsis Prediction Model (SPM) is a proprietary sepsis prediction algorithm that calculates a score correlating with the likelihood of an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision code for sepsis. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the clinical impact of an electronic sepsis alert and navigator using the Epic SPM on time to initial antimicrobial delivery. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of a nonrandomized intervention of an electronic sepsis alert system and navigator using the Epic SPM. Data from the SPM site (site A) was compared with contemporaneous data from hospitals within the same health care system (sites B-D) and historical data from site A. Nonintervention sites used a systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS)-based alert without a sepsis navigator. RESULTS: A total of 5368 admissions met inclusion criteria. Time to initial antimicrobial delivery from emergency department arrival was 3.33 h (interquartile range [IQR] 2.10-5.37 h) at site A, 3.22 h (IQR 1.97-5.60; p = 0.437, reference site A) at sites B-D, and 6.20 h (IQR 3.49-11.61 h; p < 0.001, reference site A) at site A historical. After adjustment using matching weights, there was no difference in time from threshold SPM score to initial antimicrobial between contemporaneous sites. Adjusted time to initial antimicrobial improved by 2.87 h (p < 0.001) at site A compared with site A historical. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an electronic sepsis alert system plus navigator using the Epic SPM showed no difference in time to initial antimicrobial delivery between the contemporaneous SPM alert plus sepsis navigator site and the SIRS-based electronic alert sites within the same health care system.

Impact of a multidisciplinary sepsis huddle in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a leading cause of death in hospitals requiring prompt recognition and treatment. The sepsis bundle is the cornerstone of sepsis treatment. Studies have evaluated the impact of a sepsis huddle on sepsis bundle compliance but not in sepsis identification. OBJECTIVE: Measure the effect of a multidisciplinary sepsis bedside huddle in the Emergency Department (ED) on sepsis identification and sepsis bundle compliance. METHODS: Retrospective, single-center, cohort study. Pre-huddle patients were identified via Best Practice Advisory (BPA) alert on the electronic medical record from 11/01/2019-3/31/2020. The post-huddle group were patients for whom a sepsis huddle was activated from 11/01/2020-3/31/2021. RESULTS: 116 patients met inclusion criteria and 15 were determined to not have sepsis for a total of 21 pre-huddle and 80 post-huddle patients. Comparing pre-post results, sepsis huddle increased code sepsis activation (10% vs 91%, p < 0.001); sepsis bundle compliance (24% vs 80%, p < 0.001); antibiotics within one hour (33% vs 90%, p < 0.001); culture within one hour (67% vs 95%, p < 0.001), order entry <30 min. (29% vs 86%, p < 0.001); and median order entry time (48 vs. 3 min, p < 0.001). Post-huddle, 80% of order entries were ≤ 20 min. Logistic regression predicting sepsis code found huddle to be the first predictor, (p < 0.0000005). Hour-1 bundle compliance was predicted by physician/physician assistant order ≤30 min (R2 = 0.36, p < 0.0000005). CONCLUSION: Sepsis bedside huddle in the ED improves identification and sepsis bundle compliance. Results suggest increased order entry speed caused bundle improvement.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Management and Outcomes in Patients with Septic Shock in the Emergency Department.

This study aimed to determine the impact of modifications in emergency department (ED) practices caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the clinical outcomes and management of patients with septic shock. We performed a retrospective study. Patients with septic shock who presented to the ED between 1 January 2018 and 19 January 2020 were allocated to the pre-COVID-19 group, whereas those who presented between 20 January 2020 and 31 December 2020 were assigned to the post-COVID-19 group. We used propensity score matching to compare the sepsis-related interventions and clinical outcomes. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. Of the 3697 patients included, 2254 were classified as pre-COVID-19 and 1143 as post-COVID-19. A total of 1140 propensity score-matched pairings were created. Overall, the in-hospital mortality rate was 25.5%, with no statistical difference between the pre- and post-COVID-19 groups (p = 0.92). In a matched cohort, the post-COVID-19 group had delayed lactate measurement, blood culture test, and infection source control (all p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in time to antibiotics (p = 0.19) or vasopressor administration (p = 0.09) between the groups. Although sepsis-related interventions were delayed during the COVID-19 pandemic, there was no significant difference in the in-hospital mortality between the pre- and post-COVID-19 groups.

Evaluation of the feasibility of the FAST-M maternal sepsis intervention in Pakistan: a protocol.

BACKGROUND: Maternal sepsis is a life-threatening condition, defined by organ dysfunction caused by infection during pregnancy, childbirth, and the postpartum period. It is estimated to account for between one-tenth and half (4.7% to 13.7%) of all maternal deaths globally. An international stakeholder group, including the World Health Organization, developed a maternal sepsis management bundle called "FAST-M" for resource-limited settings through a synthesis of evidence and international consensus. The FAST-M treatment bundle consists of five components: Fluids, Antibiotics, Source identification and control, assessment of the need to Transport or Transfer to a higher level of care and ongoing Monitoring (of the mother and neonate). This study aims to adapt the FAST-M intervention and evaluate its feasibility in Pakistan. METHODS: The proposed study is a mixed method, with a before and after design. The study will be conducted in two phases at the Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Hyderabad. In the first phase (formative assessment), we will adapt the bundle care tools for the local context and assess in what circumstances different components of the intervention are likely to be effective, by conducting interviews and a focus group discussion. Qualitative data will be analyzed considering a framework method approach using NVivo version 10 (QSR International, Pty Ltd.) software. The qualitative results will guide the adaptation of FAST-M intervention in local context. In the second phase, we will evaluate the feasibility of the FAST-M intervention. Quantitative analyses will be done to assess numerous outcomes: process, organizational, clinical, structural, and adverse events with quantitative comparisons made before and after implementation of the bundle. Qualitative analysis will be done to evaluate the outcomes of intervention by conducting FGDs with HCPs involved during the implementation process. This will provide an understanding and validation of quantitative findings. DISCUSSION: The utilization of care bundles can facilitate recognition and timely management of maternal sepsis. There is a need to adapt, integrate, and optimize a bundled care approach in low-resource settings in Pakistan to minimize the burden of maternal morbidities and mortalities due to sepsis.

Epidemiology, Management, and Outcomes of Sepsis in ICUs among Countries of Differing National Wealth across Asia.

Rationale: Directly comparative data on sepsis epidemiology and sepsis bundle implementation in countries of differing national wealth remain sparse. Objectives: To evaluate across countries/regions of differing income status in Asia 1) the prevalence, causes, and outcomes of sepsis as a reason for ICU admission and 2) sepsis bundle (antibiotic administration, blood culture, and lactate measurement) compliance and its association with hospital mortality. Methods: A prospective point prevalence study was conducted among 386 adult ICUs from 22 Asian countries/regions. Adult ICU participants admitted for sepsis on four separate days (representing the seasons of 2019) were recruited. Measurements and Main Results: The overall prevalence of sepsis in ICUs was 22.4% (20.9%, 24.5%, and 21.3% in low-income countries/regions [LICs]/lower middle-income countries/regions [LMICs], upper middle-income countries/regions, and high-income countries/regions [HICs], respectively; P < 0.001). Patients were younger and had lower severity of illness in LICs/LMICs. Hospital mortality was 32.6% and marginally significantly higher in LICs/LMICs than HICs on multivariable generalized mixed model analysis (adjusted odds ratio, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-3.37; P = 0.049). Sepsis bundle compliance was 21.5% at 1 hour (26.0%, 22.1%, and 16.2% in LICs/LMICs, upper middle-income countries/regions, and HICs, respectively; P < 0.001) and 36.6% at 3 hours (39.3%, 32.8%, and 38.5%, respectively; P = 0.001). Delaying antibiotic administration beyond 3 hours was the only element independently associated with increased mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 2.53; 95% confidence interval, 2.07-3.08; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Sepsis is a common cause of admission to Asian ICUs. Mortality remains high and is higher in LICs/LMICs after controlling for confounders. Sepsis bundle compliance remains low. Delaying antibiotic administration beyond 3 hours from diagnosis is associated with increased mortality. Clinical trial registered with www.ctri.nic.in (CTRI/2019/01/016898).

The Case for Virtual Sepsis Surveillance and Intervention.

Study Objective:To determine whether deployment of an integrated virtual sepsis surveillance program could improve time to antibiotics and mortality in a longitudinal cohort of non-present on admission (NPOA) sepsis cases.Methods:We used an uncontrolled pre- and poststudy design to compare time to antibiotics and mortality between a time-based cohort of NPOA sepsis cases separated by the deployment of a virtual sepsis surveillance program.Results:A total of 566 NPOA sepsis cases were included in this study. Three hundred and thirty-five cases compromised the preintervention arm, whereas the postintervention cohort included 231 cases. After deployment of the virtual sepsis surveillance program, median time to antibiotics improved from 92 to 59 min (p < 0.001). Mortality was reduced from 30% to 21% (p = 0.015).Conclusion:Deployment of a virtual sepsis surveillance program resulted in a decreased time to antibiotics and an overall reduction in NPOA sepsis mortality.

Improvement of 1st-hour bundle compliance and sepsis mortality in pediatrics after the implementation of the surviving sepsis campaign guidelines

Abstract Objectives To study the impact of the implementation of the Pediatric Surviving Sepsis Campaign protocol on early recognition of sepsis, 1 -h treatment bundle and mortality. Methods Retrospective, single-center study, before and after the implementation of the sepsis protocol. Outcomes: sepsis recognition, compliance with the 1 -h bundle (fluid resuscitation, blood culture, antibiotics), time interval to fluid resuscitation and antibiotics administration, and mortality. Patients with febrile neutropenia were excluded. The comparisons between the periods were performed using non-parametric tests and odds ratios or relative risk were calculated. Results We studied 84 patients before and 103 after the protocol implementation. There was an increase in sepsis recognition (OR 21.5 [95% CI: 10.1-45.7]), in the compliance with the 1 -h bundle as a whole (62% x 0%), and with its three components: fluid resuscitation (OR 31.1 [95% CI: 3.9−247.2]), blood culture (OR 15.9 [95% CI: 3.9−65.2]), and antibiotics (OR 35.6 [95% CI: 8.9−143.2]). Significant reduction between sepsis recognition to fluid resuscitation (152min × 12min, p < 0.001) and to antibiotics administration (137min × 30min) also occurred. The risk of death before protocol implementation was four times greater (RR 4.1 [95% CI: 1.2-14.4]), and the absolute death risk reduction was 9%. Conclusion Even if we considered the low precision of some estimates, the lower limits of the Confidence Intervals show that the implementation of the Pediatric Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines alongside a qualitive assurance initiative has led to improvements in sepsis recognition, compliance with the 1 -h treatment bundle, reduction in the time interval to fluid resuscitation and antibiotics, and reduction in sepsis mortality.

Provider-to-provider telemedicine improves adherence to sepsis bundle care in community emergency departments.

INTRODUCTION: Sepsis is a life-threatening emergency. Together, early recognition and intervention decreases mortality. Protocol-based resuscitation in the emergency department (ED) has improved survival in sepsis patients, but guideline-adherent care is less common in low-volume EDs. This study examined the association between provider-to-provider telemedicine and adherence with sepsis bundle components in rural community hospitals. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study of adults presenting with sepsis or septic shock in community EDs participating in rural telemedicine networks. The primary outcome was adherence to four sepsis bundle requirements: lactate measurement within 3 hours, blood culture before antibiotics, broad-spectrum antibiotics, and adequate fluid resuscitation. Multivariable generalized estimating equations estimated the association between telemedicine and adherence. RESULTS: In this cohort (n = 655), 5.6% of subjects received ED telemedicine consults. The telemedicine group was more likely to be male and have a higher severity of illness. After adjusting for severity and chief complaint, total sepsis bundle adherence was higher in the telemedicine group compared with the non-telemedicine group (aOR 17.27 [95%CI 6.64-44.90], p < 0.001). Telemedicine consultation was associated with higher adherence with three of the individual bundle components: lactate, antibiotics, and fluid resuscitation. DISCUSSION: Telemedicine patients were more likely to receive initial blood lactate measurement, timely broad-spectrum antibiotics, and adequate fluid resuscitation. In rural, community EDs, telemedicine may improve sepsis care and potentially reduce disparities in sepsis outcomes at low-volume facilities. Future work should identify specific components of telemedicine-augmented care that improve performance with sepsis quality indicators.

Improvement of 1st-hour bundle compliance and sepsis mortality in pediatrics after the implementation of the surviving sepsis campaign guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: To study the impact of the implementation of the Pediatric Surviving Sepsis Campaign protocol on early recognition of sepsis, 1-h treatment bundle and mortality. METHODS: Retrospective, single-center study, before and after the implementation of the sepsis protocol. OUTCOMES: sepsis recognition, compliance with the 1-h bundle (fluid resuscitation, blood culture, antibiotics), time interval to fluid resuscitation and antibiotics administration, and mortality. Patients with febrile neutropenia were excluded. The comparisons between the periods were performed using non-parametric tests and odds ratios or relative risk were calculated. RESULTS: We studied 84 patients before and 103 after the protocol implementation. There was an increase in sepsis recognition (OR 21.5 [95% CI: 10.1-45.7]), in the compliance with the 1-h bundle as a whole (62% x 0%), and with its three components: fluid resuscitation (OR 31.1 [95% CI: 3.9-247.2]), blood culture (OR 15.9 [95% CI: 3.9-65.2]), and antibiotics (OR 35.6 [95% CI: 8.9-143.2]). Significant reduction between sepsis recognition to fluid resuscitation (152min×12min, p<0.001) and to antibiotics administration (137min×30min) also occurred. The risk of death before protocol implementation was four times greater (RR 4.1 [95% CI: 1.2-14.4]), and the absolute death risk reduction was 9%. CONCLUSION: Even if we considered the low precision of some estimates, the lower limits of the Confidence Intervals show that the implementation of the Pediatric Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines alongside a qualitive assurance initiative has led to improvements in sepsis recognition, compliance with the 1-h treatment bundle, reduction in the time interval to fluid resuscitation and antibiotics, and reduction in sepsis mortality.

Blood Culture Results and Overtreatment Associated With the Use of a 1-Hour Sepsis Bundle.

BACKGROUND: Some experts recommend using a 1-h sepsis bundle, but clinical data supporting this strategy are lacking. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the rate of, and clinical predictors for, bacteremia for patients undergoing a 1-h sepsis bundle, and to determine the percentage of "code sepsis" patients who are ultimately diagnosed with sepsis or a bacterial infection. METHODS: This retrospective chart review evaluated code sepsis patients from three emergency departments (EDs) that utilize a 1-h sepsis bundle. The primary outcome was the rate of true-positive blood cultures. Secondarily, we analyzed various clinical factors using logistic regression analysis to determine which are associated with bacteremia. RESULTS: Of the 544 code sepsis patients analyzed, 33.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 29.9-38.0%) were ultimately diagnosed with sepsis, and 54.6% (95% CI 50.3-58.8%) were diagnosed with a bacterial infection. Exactly 7.0% (95% CI 5.0-9.5%) of the blood cultures performed were true positives. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, temperature > 38°C (100.4°F) or < 36°C (96.8°F), lactate > 4 mmol/L, and indwelling line/device were found to be positively associated with true-positive blood cultures. CONCLUSION: In a group of code sepsis patients from facilities that use a 1-h sepsis bundle, the majority were ultimately not diagnosed with sepsis, and nearly half did not have a bacterial infection. A small minority of patients had bacteremia. Restricting blood culture ordering in patients with possible sepsis to only those who have increased risk for bacteremia could lead to a more judicious use of blood cultures.

Sepsis: Symptoms, Assessment, Diagnosis, and the Hour-1 Bundle in Patients With Cancer.

Sepsis has a higher incidence of hospital stays and poorer morbidity and mortality outcomes in patients with cancer. The development of infection in weakened immune systems and prolonged treatment courses increase the risk for sepsis in patients with cancer. The causes of infection that can lead to sepsis in patients with cancer are further complicated by disease- or therapy-related neutropenia. Early recognition of sepsis is critical for prompt treatment to prevent tissue damage, organ failure, and mortality. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommends the Hour-1 bundle as best practice for sepsis management.

Emergency department sepsis huddles: Achieving excellence for sepsis benchmarks in New York State.

The sepsis order set at our institution was created with the intent to facilitate the prompt initiation of appropriate sepsis care. Once clinical features meeting criteria for systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) are identified and an infectious source is considered, a "sepsis huddle" is concomitantly initiated. The sepsis huddle was implemented in March of 2016 in order to increase compliance with the sepsis bundles. The sepsis huddle is called via overhead paging system in the emergency department (ED) to notify all staff that there is a patient present who meets SIRS criteria with concern for sepsis requiring immediate attention. The sepsis order set is utilized for these patients and includes laboratory testing, treatment, and monitoring items to meet sepsis "bundle" compliance. In addition, it suggests antibiotic options to be administered based on the presumed source of infection. Each team member responding to a sepsis huddle has a pre-established role outlined to facilitate timely treatment. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, (CMS), is part of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). CMS sepsis guidelines call for periodic patient reassessment, including repeat vital signs, pertinent physical examination findings, and timed lactic acid measurement to determine a patient's response to resuscitation efforts. Our established order set has automated some of these reassessment features to facilitate compliance. Sepsis huddle initiation also triggers a department staff member to track the timing and completion of serial blood draws. Utilizing and adhering to the guidelines of this methodology in the management of these patients has enabled our hospital to improve benchmarking compliance from previously underperforming at the 31st and 49th percentiles in 2015, prior to initiation of the huddle, to a peak compliance at the 81st and 91st percentiles in 2016 and 65th and 83rd percentiles in 2017 for the 3-hour and 6-hour bundles respectively.

Does Gender Matter in Septic Patient Outcomes?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine potential gender disparities in relation to factors associated with sepsis management among a cohort of patients admitted through an emergency department with a discharge diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock. Sepsis is one of the leading causes of death globally, with significant associated costs. Predictors of survival for those with sepsis-related diagnoses are complex. DESIGN AND METHODS: The study had a retrospective, descriptive cross-sectional design. The sample (N = 482) included patients 18 years of age or older who presented to the emergency department of a nonprofit, Magnet-recognized, acute care hospital located in southern California. Subjects included those who subsequently met the criteria for a discharge diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock as defined by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign. Patient characteristics, clinical variables, care management processes, and outcomes were extracted from the electronic health record. A multivariate model was analyzed. FINDINGS: The sample included 234 women (48.5%) and 248 men (51.5%). Logistic regression with eight independent variables (discharge diagnosis, age, comorbidities, length of hospital stay, source of infection, first serum lactate level measured, recommended fluids administered, and gender) reliably predicted odds for patient survival, Ï°2 (12) = 118.38, p < .001, and correctly classified 77.3% of cases. All eight independent variables significantly contributed to the model. Men had a higher likelihood of hospital survival than women (odds ratio 1.68; 95% confidence interval 1.01-2.79; p = .045). CONCLUSIONS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign has provided a clear pathway for care of patients with sepsis-related diagnoses. Therapeutic strategies should be developed to address differences in outcome by gender. The adoption of more aggressive applications of evidence-based interventions for these patients may result in better patient outcomes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Providers should understand the importance of adhering to sepsis protocols, minimizing treatment disparities, and recognizing gender differences.

Additional Telemedicine Rounds as a Successful Performance-Improvement Strategy for Sepsis Management: Observational Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a major health care problem with high morbidity and mortality rates and affects millions of patients. Telemedicine, defined as the exchange of medical information via electronic communication, improves the outcome of patients with sepsis and decreases the mortality rate and length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU). Additional telemedicine rounds could be an effective component of performance-improvement programs for sepsis, especially in underserved rural areas and hospitals without ready access to critical care physicians. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the impact of additional daily telemedicine rounds on adherence to sepsis bundles. We hypothesized that additional telemedicine support may increase adherence to sepsis guidelines and improve the detection rates of sepsis and septic shock. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational, multicenter study between January 2014 and July 2015 with one tele-ICU center and three ICUs in Germany. We implemented telemedicine as part of standard care and collected data continuously during the study. During the daily telemedicine rounds, routine screening for sepsis was conducted and adherence to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign's 3-hour and 6-hour sepsis bundles were evaluated. RESULTS: In total, 1168 patients were included in this study, of which 196 were positive for severe sepsis and septic shock. We found that additional telemedicine rounds improved adherence to the 3-hour (Quarter 1, 35% vs Quarter 6, 76.2%; P=.01) and 6-hour (Quarter 1, 50% vs Quarter 6, 95.2%; P=.001) sepsis bundles. In addition, we noted an increase in adherence to the item "Administration of fluids when hypotension" (Quarter 1, 80% vs Quarter 6, 100%; P=.049) of the 3-hour bundle and the item "Remeasurement of lactate" (Quarter 1, 65% vs Quarter 6, 100%, P=.003) of the 6-hour bundle. The ICU length of stay after diagnosis of severe sepsis and septic shock remained unchanged over the observation period. Due to a higher number of patients with sepsis in Quarter 5 (N=60) than in other quarters, we observed stronger effects of the additional rounds on mortality in this quarter (Quarter 1, 50% vs Quarter 5, 23.33%, P=.046). CONCLUSIONS: Additional telemedicine rounds are an effective component of and should be included in performance-improvement programs for sepsis management.

Mortality in Patients With Septic Shock by Multidrug Resistant Bacteria: Risk Factors and Impact of Sepsis Treatments.

BACKGROUND:: Patients with septic shock by multidrug resistant (MDR) microorganism maybe considered a specific population of critical patients at very high risk of death in whom the effects of standard sepsis treatment has never been assessed. The objective of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the risk factors for 30-day mortality and the impact of sepsis management in patients with septic shock caused by MDR bacteria. METHODS:: Patients with septic shock by MDR bacteria admitted to the mixed intensive care unit (ICU) of Modena University Hospital during a 6-year period were studied. The clinical and microbiological characteristics and sepsis treatments provided were analyzed and compared between survivors (S) and nonsurvivors (NS) at 30 days after septic shock appearance. RESULTS:: Ninety-four patients were studied. All therapeutic interventions applied to patients during their ICU stay did not show statistical significance between S and NS groups, except for administration of immunoglobulin M (IgM) preparation which were provided more frequently in S group ( P < .05). At the multivariate adjusted analysis, preexisting cancer (odds ratio [OR] = 2.965) and Acinetobacter baumannii infections (OR = 3.197) were independently correlated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality, whereas treatment with IgM preparation was protective (OR = 0.283). CONCLUSIONS:: This retrospective study showed that in patients with septic shock caused by MDR bacteria, history of cancer and infection sustained by A baumannii increase the risk of mortality and that standard sepsis treatments do not seem to provide any protective effect. Adjunctive therapy with IgM preparation seems to be beneficial, but further appropriate studies are needed to confirm the results observed.

Imipenem and normal saline with cyclophosphamide have positive effects on the intestinal barrier in rats with sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction caused the dysregulation of host inflammatory response and immunosuppression to infection Early recognition and intervention are hence of paramount importance. In this respect the "sepsis bundle" was proposed in 2004 to be instituted in cases of suspected sepsis. OBJECTIVE AND HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesised that a combination treatment of the sepsis bundle with cyclophosphamide would improve the function of the intestinal mucosa and enhance survival in rats with induced sepsis. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into 5 different groups: sham, cecal ligation and puncture (CLP), cyclophosphamide (CTX), imipenem+normal saline (NS) and imipenem+NS+CTX. Cecal ligation and puncture were used for inducing the polymicrobial sepsis. Western-blot was used to measure the occludin protein, and ELISA for examining the plasma level of cytokines IL-6, IL-10 and TNF-α. TUNEL assay for testing the intestinal mucosal apoptosis, and hematoxylin-eosin staining for observing the intestinal mucosal changes. The permeability of intestinal mucosa was determined by the plasma level of FD-70. The results showed that the combination treatment of the sepsis bundle with cyclophosphamide attenuated cytokine levels, inhibited epithelial cell apoptosis and improved the function of the intestinal barrier. The survival rate of the group treated with the combined therapy was significantly higher than that of the other groups. CONCLUSION: The combination treatment of sepsis bundle with cyclophosphamide improves the function of the intestinal barrier and enhances survival in septic rats.

Six-Hour Sepsis Bundle Decreases Mortality: Truth or Illusion - A Prospective Observational Study.

AIM: The aim of the study is to evaluate whether 6-h sepsis bundle component compliance (complete vs. incomplete) decreases mortality in pediatric patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. METHODOLOGY: The study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital. Patients aged 1 month-13 years admitted to pediatric intensive care unit with severe sepsis, or septic shock were prospectively enrolled. The clinical data and blood investigations required for sepsis bundle were recorded. Predicted mortality was calculated at admission by the online pediatric index of mortality-2 (PIM-2) score calculator. Patients who fulfilled all the components of 6-h sepsis bundle were taken as compliant while failure to fulfill even a single component rendered them noncompliant. The outcome was recorded as died or discharged. RESULTS: Of 116 patients, 90 (77.59%) had 100% sepsis bundle component compliance and were taken into the compliant group while the rest 26 (22.41%) were noncompliant. Forty out of 90 patients (44.4%) died in compliant group in comparison to 5 out of 26 (19.3%) in noncompliant group, P = 0.020. The pre- and post-interventional lactates were significantly higher in compliant group as compared to the noncompliant group, P < 0.0001 and 0.019, respectively. Rising lactate level parallels increasing predicted mortality by PIM-2 score in compliant group, but this association failed to reach significance in noncompliant group which can be attributed to less number of subjects available in this group. CONCLUSION: Irrespective of sepsis bundle compliance (complete/incomplete), outcome depends on the severity of illness reflected by high lactate and predicted mortality.

Factors Affecting Early Treatment Goals of Sepsis Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Sepsis is a major cause of emergency medicine admission. It is associated with high mortality and morbidity. Even though sepsis is common in the Indian subcontinent, there is a paucity of data on the management of sepsis in India. The aim was to study the factors affecting early treatment goals. METHODS: All clinically suspected sepsis patients consenting to be part of the study were included. The diagnosis of sepsis was made by the treating physician in the emergency department as per the Surviving Sepsis Guidelines criteria. All cases were managed as per institutional treatment protocol. The patients were prospectively followed up and the time taken to achieve the goal-directed sepsis bundle documented and analyzed. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Of the 75 patients studied, the 3-hour(h) bundles were achieved in 70.7% of cases and 6-h bundles were achieved in 84% of cases. Meantime for obtaining blood culture was 107 min and administration of first dose antibiotics was 134 min. Thirty patients failed to achieve the early treatment goals, of which six were under-triaged, seven due to physicians delay in recognizing sepsis, 11 due to logistical delay, and six were due to financial constraints. CONCLUSION: The sepsis bundle goals were not achieved because of various factors such as under triaging, delay in diagnosis, logistical delay, and financial constraints. Further studies on whether sensitization of medical fraternity about sepsis, implementation of insurance policies for patient care or better point of care diagnostics would aid in achieving the bundles may be evaluated further.