Health inequities in the diagnosis and outcome of sepsis in Argentina: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic variables impact health outcomes but have rarely been evaluated in critical illness. Low- and middle-income countries bear the highest burden of sepsis and also have significant health inequities. In Argentina, public hospitals serve the poorest segment of the population, while private institutions serve patients with health coverage. Our objective was to analyze differences in mortality between public and private hospitals, using Sepsis-3 definitions. METHODS: This is a multicenter, prospective cohort study including patients with sepsis admitted to 49 Argentine ICUs lasting 3 months, beginning on July 1, 2016. Epidemiological, clinical, and socioeconomic status variables and hospital characteristics were compared between patients admitted to both types of institutions. RESULTS: Of the 809 patients included, 367 (45%) and 442 (55%) were admitted to public and private hospitals, respectively. Those in public institutions were younger (56 ± 18 vs. 64 ± 18; p < 0.01), with more comorbidities (Charlson score 2 [0-4] vs. 1 [0-3]; p < 0.01), fewer education years (7 [7-12] vs. 12 [10-16]; p < 0.01), more frequently unemployed/informally employed (30% vs. 7%; p < 0.01), had similar previous self-rated health status (70 [50-90] vs. 70 [50-90] points; p = 0.30), longer pre-admission symptoms (48 [24-96] vs. 24 [12-48] h; p < 0.01), had been previously evaluated more frequently in any healthcare venue (28 vs. 20%; p < 0.01), and had higher APACHE II, SOFA, lactate levels, and mechanical ventilation utilization. ICU admission as septic shock was more frequent in patients admitted to public hospitals (47 vs. 35%; p < 0.01), as were infections caused by multiresistant microorganisms. Sepsis management in the ICU showed no differences. Twenty-eight-day mortality was higher in public hospitals (42% vs. 24%; p < 0.01) as was hospital mortality (47% vs. 30%; p < 0.01). Admission to a public hospital was an independent predictor of mortality together with comorbidities, lactate, SOFA, and mechanical ventilation; in an alternative prediction model, it acted as a correlate of pre-hospital symptom duration and infections caused by multiresistant microorganisms. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in public hospitals belonged to a socially disadvantaged group and were sicker at admission, had septic shock more frequently, and had higher mortality. Unawareness of disease severity and delays in the health system might be associated with late admission. This marked difference in outcome between patients served by public and private institutions constitutes a state of health inequity.

Predictive Validity of Sepsis-3 Definitions and Sepsis Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients: A Cohort Study in 49 ICUs in Argentina.

OBJECTIVES: The new Sepsis-3 definitions have been scarcely assessed in low- and middle-income countries; besides, regional information of sepsis outcomes is sparse. Our objective was to evaluate Sepsis-3 definition performance in Argentina. DESIGN: Cohort study of 3-month duration beginning on July 1, 2016. SETTINGS: Forty-nine ICUs. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients admitted to the ICU with suspected infection that triggered blood cultures and antibiotic administration. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients were classified as having infection, sepsis (infection + change in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment ≥ 2 points), and septic shock (vasopressors + lactate > 2 mmol/L). Patients on vasopressors and lactate less than or equal to 2 mmol/L (cardiovascular dysfunction) were analyzed separately, as those on vasopressors without serum lactate measurement. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome was also recorded. Main outcome was hospital mortality. Of 809 patients, 6% had infection, 29% sepsis, 20% cardiovascular dysfunction, 40% septic shock, and 3% received vasopressors with lactate unmeasured. Hospital mortality was 13%, 20%, 39%, 51%, and 41%, respectively (p = 0.000). Independent predictors of outcome were lactate, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, comorbidities, prior duration of symptoms (hr), mechanical ventilation requirement, and infection by highly resistant microorganisms. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for mortality for systemic inflammatory response syndrome and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment were 0.53 (0.48-0.55) and 0.74 (0.69-0.77), respectively (p = 0.000). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing severity of Sepsis-3 categories adequately tracks mortality; cardiovascular dysfunction subgroup, not included in Sepsis-3, has distinct characteristics. Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score shows adequate prognosis accuracy-contrary to systemic inflammatory response syndrome. This study supports the predictive validity of Sepsis-3 definitions.

Characteristics of resuscitation, and association between use of dynamic tests of fluid responsiveness and outcomes in septic patients: results of a multicenter prospective cohort study in Argentina.

BACKGROUND: Resuscitation of septic patients regarding goals, monitoring aspects and therapy is highly variable. Our aim was to characterize cardiovascular and fluid management of sepsis in Argentina, a low and middle-income country (LMIC). Furthermore, we sought to test whether the utilization of dynamic tests of fluid responsiveness, as a guide for fluid therapy after initial resuscitation in patients with persistent or recurrent hypoperfusion, was associated with decreased mortality. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a national, multicenter prospective cohort study (n = 787) fulfilling Sepsis-3 definitions. Epidemiological characteristics, hemodynamic management data, type of fluids and vasopressors administered, physiological variables denoting hypoperfusion, use of tests of fluid responsiveness, and outcomes, were registered. Independent predictors of mortality were identified with logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Initially, 584 of 787 patients (74%) had mean arterial pressure (MAP) < 65 mm Hg and/or signs of hypoperfusion and received 30 mL/kg of fluids, mostly normal saline (53%) and Ringer lactate (35%). Vasopressors and/or inotropes were administered in 514 (65%) patients, mainly norepinephrine (100%) and dobutamine (9%); in 22%, vasopressors were administered before ending the fluid load. After this, 413 patients (53%) presented persisting or recurrent hypotension and/or hypoperfusion, which prompted administration of additional fluid, based on: lactate levels (66%), urine output (62%), heart rate (54%), central venous O2 saturation (39%), central venous-arterial PCO2 difference (38%), MAP (31%), dynamic tests of fluid responsiveness (30%), capillary-refill time (28%), mottling (26%), central venous pressure (24%), cardiac index (13%) and/or pulmonary wedge pressure (3%). Independent predictors of mortality were SOFA and Charlson scores, lactate, requirement of mechanical ventilation, and utilization of dynamic tests of fluid responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective observational study assessing the characteristics of resuscitation of septic patients in Argentina, a LMIC, the prevalent use of initial fluid bolus with normal saline and Ringer lactate and the use of norepinephrine as the most frequent vasopressor, reflect current worldwide practices. After initial resuscitation with 30 mL/kg of fluids and vasopressors, 413 patients developed persistent or recurrent hypoperfusion, which required further volume expansion. In this setting, the assessment of fluid responsiveness with dynamic tests to guide fluid resuscitation was independently associated with decreased mortality.