Functional dependence following intensive care unit-treated sepsis: three-year follow-up results from the prospective Mid-German Sepsis Cohort (MSC).

Background: Surviving sepsis can lead to chronic physical, psychological and cognitive impairments, which affect millions of patients worldwide, including survivors after COVID-19 viral sepsis. We aimed to characterize the magnitude and trajectory of functional dependence and new impairments post-sepsis. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study including sepsis survivors who had been discharged from five German intensive care units (ICUs), until 36 months post-discharge. Primary outcome was functional dependence, defined as ≥1 impaired activity of daily living (ADL; 10-item ADL score <100), self-reported nursing care dependence or nursing care level. Secondary outcome was post-sepsis morbidity in the physical, psychological or cognitive domain. We used a multistate, competing risk model to address competing events in the course of dependence, and conducted multiple linear regression analyses to identify predictors associated with the ADL score. Findings: Of 3210 sepsis patients screened, 1968 survived the ICU treatment (61.3%). A total of 753 were included in the follow-up assessments of the Mid-German Sepsis cohort. Patients had a median age of 65 (Q1-Q3 56-74) years, 64.8% (488/753) were male and 76.1% (573/753) had a septic shock. Considering competing risk modelling, the probability of still being functional dependent was about 25%, while about 30% regained functional independence and 45% died within the three years post-sepsis. Patients reported a high burden of new and often overlapping impairments until three years post-sepsis. In the subgroup of three-year survivors (n = 330), new physical impairments affected 91.2% (n = 301) while new cognitive and psychological impairments were reported by 57.9% (n = 191) and 40.9% (n = 135), respectively. Patients with pre-existing functional limitations and higher age were at risk for low ADL scores three years after sepsis. Interpretation: Sepsis survivorship was associated with a broad range of new impairments and led to functional dependence in around one quarter of patients. Targeted measures are needed to mitigate the burden of this Post-Sepsis-Syndrome and increase the proportion of patients that achieve functional improvements. Funding: This work was supported by the Integrated Research and Treatment Center, Center for Sepsis Control and Care (CSCC) at the Jena University Hospital funded by the German Ministry of Education and Research and by the Rudolf Presl GmbH & Co, Kreischa, Germany.

How are Long-Covid, Post-Sepsis-Syndrome and Post-Intensive-Care-Syndrome related? A conceptional approach based on the current research literature.

Long-Covid (LC), Post-Sepsis-Syndrome (PSS) and Post-Intensive-Care-Syndrome (PICS) show remarkable overlaps in their clinical presentation. Nevertheless, it is unclear if they are distinct syndromes, which may co-occur in the same patient, or if they are three different labels to describe similar symptoms, assigned on the basis on patient history and professional perspective of the treating physician. Therefore, we reviewed the current literature on the relation between LC, PSS and PICS. To date, the three syndromes cannot reliably be distinguished due similarities in clinical presentation as they share the cognitive, psychological and physical impairments with only different probabilities of occurrence and a heterogeneity in individual expression. The diagnosis is furthermore hindered by a lack of specific diagnostic tools. It can be concluded that survivors after COVID-19 sepsis likely have more frequent and more severe consequences than patients with milder COVID-19 courses, and that are some COVID-19-specific sequelae, e.g. an increased risk for venous thromboembolism in the 30 days after the acute disease, which occur less often after sepsis of other causes. Patients may profit from leveraging synergies from PICS, PSS and LC treatment as well as from experiences gained from infection-associated chronic conditions in general. Disentangling molecular pathomechanisms may enable future targeted therapies that go beyond symptomatic treatment.

Improving prevention and early detection of sepsis among patient groups at risk: Introducing a model for a multimodal information campaign-The SepWiss study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction due to a dysregulated host response to infection. Annually, sepsis leads to approx. 90.000 deaths in Germany. Risk factors include amongst others older age (>60), innate or acquired dysfunction of the immune system, and underlying chronic diseases of the lung, heart, liver, or kidneys. The manifestation of sepsis is a medical emergency, and patient outcomes depend on timely diagnosis and immediate treatment. In addition, vaccinations e.g., against pneumococci or influenza virus, are a highly effective public health tool to prevent the most common underlying infections that may lead to sepsis. However, a lack of public awareness for the relevance of vaccination and detecting sepsis as an emergency underlines the need for public health interventions that address these issues. SepWiss aims to evaluate the effects of a multimodal information campaign designed to address this lack of awareness among the risk population in Germany. METHODS: SepWiss is an intervention at state level, consisting of a multimodal information campaign targeting risk groups in the German federal states of Berlin and Brandenburg (intervention region). Based on available evidence, various information formats were developed and implemented by outdoor advertising, social media, educational formats and through stakeholders' platforms, starting in August 2021. The control region comprises of the remaining 14 German federal states. We will analyze vaccination coverage (primary outcome), and sepsis knowledge, the ability to detect sepsis as an emergency, and attitude towards vaccination (secondary outcomes) amongst the risk population in a controlled before-after comparison. The implementation is accompanied by a mixed-method process evaluation. DISCUSSION: SepWiss is the first project of its kind to evaluate a complex multi-faceted evidence-based information campaign with regards to the topics of vaccination coverage, and the importance of sepsis detection and prevention for the most vulnerable populations in Germany. Results will be valuable for informing further nationwide campaigns. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Registry for Clinical Trials: DRKS00024475. Registered February 24th, 2021.

Long versus short course anti-microbial therapy of uncomplicated Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend at least 2 weeks duration of antibiotic therapy (DOT) for patients with uncomplicated Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (SAB) but the evidence for this recommendation is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic literature review assessing current evidence for recommended DOT for patients with SAB. METHODS: The following are the methods used for this study. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, the Cochrane Database and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to March 30, 2024. References of eligible studies were screened and experts in the field contacted for additional articles. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All clinical studies, regardless of design, publication status and language. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with uncomplicated SAB. INTERVENTIONS: Long (>14 days; >18 days; 11-16 days) vs. short (≤14 days; 10-18 days; 6-10 days, respectively) DOT with the DOT being defined as the first until the last day of antibiotic therapy. ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS: Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I-tool. METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality. Only studies presenting results of adjusted analyses for mortality were included. Data synthesis could not be performed. RESULTS: Eleven nonrandomized studies were identified that fulfilled the pre-defined inclusion criteria, of which three studies reported adjusted effect ratios. Only these were included in the final analysis. We did not find any RCT. Two studies with 1230 patients reported the primary endpoint 90-day all-cause mortality. Neither found a statistically significant superiority for longer (>14 days; 11-16 days) or shorter DOT (≤14 days; 6-10 days, respectively) for patients with uncomplicated SAB. Two studies investigated the secondary endpoint 30-day all-cause mortality (>18 days; 11-16 days vs. 10-18 days; 6-10 days, respectively) and did not find a statistically significant difference. All included studies had a moderate risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Sound evidence that supports any duration of antibiotic treatment for patients with uncomplicated SAB is lacking.

Sepsis incidence, suspicion, prediction and mortality in emergency medical services: a cohort study related to the current international sepsis guideline.

PURPOSE: Sepsis suspicion by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is associated with improved patient outcomes. This study assessed sepsis incidence and recognition by EMS and analyzed which of the screening tools recommended by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign best facilitates sepsis prediction. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of claims data from health insurances (n = 221,429 EMS cases), and paramedics' and emergency physicians' EMS documentation (n = 110,419); analyzed outcomes were: sepsis incidence and case fatality compared to stroke and myocardial infarction, the extent of documentation for screening-relevant variables and sepsis suspicion, tools' intersections for screening positive in identical EMS cases and their predictive ability for an inpatient sepsis diagnosis. RESULTS: Incidence of sepsis (1.6%) was similar to myocardial infarction (2.6%) and stroke (2.7%); however, 30-day case fatality rate was almost threefold higher (31.7% vs. 13.4%; 11.8%). Complete vital sign documentation was achieved in 8.2% of all cases. Paramedics never, emergency physicians rarely (0.1%) documented a sepsis suspicion, respectively septic shock. NEWS2 had the highest sensitivity (73.1%; Specificity:81.6%) compared to qSOFA (23.1%; Sp:96.6%), SIRS (28.2%; Sp:94.3%) and MEWS (48.7%; Sp:88.1%). Depending on the tool, 3.7% to 19.4% of all cases screened positive; only 0.8% in all tools simultaneously. CONCLUSION: Incidence and mortality underline the need for better sepsis awareness, documentation of vital signs and use of screening tools. Guidelines may omit MEWS and SIRS as recommendations for prehospital providers since they were inferior in all accuracy measures. Though no tool performed ideally, NEWS2 qualifies as the best tool to predict the highest proportion of septic patients and to rule out cases that are likely non-septic.

Understanding health care pathways of patients with sepsis: protocol of a mixed-methods analysis of health care utilization, experiences, and needs of patients with and after sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is associated with about 20% of deaths worldwide. It often presents with non-specific initial symptoms, making its emergency treatment an interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral challenge. Three in four sepsis survivors suffers from new cognitive, psychological, or physical sequelae for which specific treatment concepts are scarce. The AVENIR project aims to improve the understanding of patient pathways, and subjective care experiences and needs along the entire healthcare pathway before, with and after sepsis. Based on this, concrete recommendations for the organization of care and patient information materials will be developed with close patient participation. METHODS: Mixed-methods study including (1) analysis of anonymized nationwide health claims data from Germany, (2) linkage of health claims data with patient care reports (PCR) of emergency medical services from study regions in two federal states within Germany, and (3) qualitative exploration of the patient, relative, and care provider perspective on sepsis care. In (1), we analyze inpatient and outpatient health care utilization until 30 days pre-sepsis; clinical sepsis care including intra- and inter-hospital transfers; and rehabilitation, inpatient and outpatient aftercare of sepsis survivors as well as costs for health care utilization until 24 months post-sepsis. We attempt to identify survivor classes with similar health care utilization by Latent Class Analyses. In (2), PCR are linked with health claims data to establish a comprehensive database outlining care pathways for sepsis patients from pre-hospital to follow-up. We investigate e.g., whether correct initial assessment is associated with acute (e.g., same-day lethality) and long-term (e.g., new need for care, long-term mortality) outcomes of patients. We compare the performance of sepsis-specific screening tools such as qSOFA, NEWS-2 or PRESEP in the pre-clinical setting. In (3), semi-structured interviews as well as synchronous and asynchronous online focus groups are conducted and analyzed using qualitative content analyses techniques. DISCUSSION: The results of the AVENIR study will contribute to a deeper understanding of sepsis care pathways in Germany. They may serve as a base for improvements and innovations in sepsis care, that in the long-term can contribute to reduce the personal, medical, and societal burden of sepsis and its sepsis sequelae. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at German Clinical Trial Register (ID: DRKS00031302, date of registration: 5th May 2023).

Understanding the biases to sepsis surveillance and quality assurance caused by inaccurate coding in administrative health data.

PURPOSE: Timely and accurate data on the epidemiology of sepsis are essential to inform policy decisions and research priorities. We aimed to investigate the validity of inpatient administrative health data (IAHD) for surveillance and quality assurance of sepsis care. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective validation study in a disproportional stratified random sample of 10,334 inpatient cases of age ≥ 15 years treated in 2015-2017 in ten German hospitals. The accuracy of coding of sepsis and risk factors for mortality in IAHD was assessed compared to reference standard diagnoses obtained by a chart review. Hospital-level risk-adjusted mortality of sepsis as calculated from IAHD information was compared to mortality calculated from chart review information. RESULTS: ICD-coding of sepsis in IAHD showed high positive predictive value (76.9-85.7% depending on sepsis definition), but low sensitivity (26.8-38%), which led to an underestimation of sepsis incidence (1.4% vs. 3.3% for severe sepsis-1). Not naming sepsis in the chart was strongly associated with under-coding of sepsis. The frequency of correctly naming sepsis and ICD-coding of sepsis varied strongly between hospitals (range of sensitivity of naming: 29-71.7%, of ICD-diagnosis: 10.7-58.5%). Risk-adjusted mortality of sepsis per hospital calculated from coding in IAHD showed no substantial correlation to reference standard risk-adjusted mortality (r = 0.09). CONCLUSION: Due to the under-coding of sepsis in IAHD, previous epidemiological studies underestimated the burden of sepsis in Germany. There is a large variability between hospitals in accuracy of diagnosing and coding of sepsis. Therefore, IAHD alone is not suited to assess quality of sepsis care.

Association between hospital onset of infection and outcomes in sepsis patients - A propensity score matched cohort study based on health claims data in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired infections are a common source of sepsis. Hospital onset of sepsis was found to be associated with higher acute mortality and hospital costs, yet its impact on long-term patient-relevant outcomes and costs is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the association between sepsis origin and acute and long-term outcomes based on a nationwide population-based cohort of sepsis patients in Germany. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used nationwide health claims data from 23 million health insurance beneficiaries. Sepsis patients with hospital-acquired infections (HAI) were identified by ICD-10-codes in a cohort of adult patients with hospital-treated sepsis between 2013 and 2014. Cases without these ICD-10-codes were considered as sepsis cases with community-acquired infection (CAI) and were matched with HAI sepsis patients by propensity score matching. Outcomes included in-hospital/12-month mortality and costs, as well as readmissions and nursing care dependency until 12 months postsepsis. RESULTS: We matched 33,110 HAI sepsis patients with 28,614 CAI sepsis patients and 22,234 HAI sepsis hospital survivors with 19,364 CAI sepsis hospital survivors. HAI sepsis patients had a higher hospital mortality than CAI sepsis patients (32.8% vs. 25.4%, RR 1.3, p < .001). Similarly, 12-months postacute mortality was higher (37.2% vs. 30.1%, RR=1.2, p < .001). Hospital and 12-month health care costs were 178% and 22% higher in HAI patients than in CAI patients, respectively. Twelve months postsepsis, HAI sepsis survivors were more often newly dependent on nursing care (33.4% vs. 24.0%, RR=1.4, p < .001) and experienced 5% more hospital readmissions (mean number of readmissions: 2.1 vs. 2.0, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: HAI sepsis patients face an increased risk of adverse outcomes both during the acute sepsis episode and in the long-term. Measures to prevent HAI and its progression into sepsis may be an opportunity to mitigate the burden of long-term impairments and costs of sepsis, e.g., by early detection of HAI progressing into sepsis, particularly in normal wards; adequate sepsis management and adherence to sepsis bundles in hospital-acquired sepsis; and an improved infection prevention and control.

Challenges of assessing the burden of sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is one of the most frequent causes of death worldwide, but the recording of population-based epidemiology is challenging, which is why reliable data on sepsis incidence and mortality are only available in a few, mostly highly-resourced countries. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this narrative review is to provide an overview of sepsis epidemiology worldwide and in Germany based on current literature, to identify challenges in this research area, and to give an outlook on future developments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Selective literature review. PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for current literature. The results were processed narratively. RESULTS: Based on modeling studies or meta-analyses of prospective studies, global annual sepsis incidence was found to be 276-678/100,000 persons. Case fatality ranged from 22.5 to 26.7%. However, current data sources have several limitations, as administrative data of selected individual countries-mostly with high income-were used as their basis. In these administrative data, sepsis is captured with limited validity. Prospective studies using clinical data often have limited comparability or lack population reference. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of reliable data sources and definitions to monitor the epidemiology of sepsis and collect reliable global estimates. Increased policy efforts and new scientific approaches are needed to improve our understanding of sepsis epidemiology, identify vulnerable populations, and develop and target effective interventions.

Most patients with an increased risk for sepsis-related morbidity or death do not recognize sepsis as a medical emergency: results of a survey study using case vignettes.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a medical emergency with potentially life-threatening consequences. Patients play a crucial role in preventing and recognizing sepsis at an early stage. The understanding of risk groups' sepsis knowledge and their ability to use this knowledge to recognize sepsis as an emergency is incomplete. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey in Germany and included a sample of 740 persons stratified by age (< 60 years, ≥ 60 years), specific chronic diseases (e.g. diabetes, chronic diseases, cancer), and region (Berlin/Brandenburg vs. other federal states of Germany). Standardized questionnaires were administered by a market research institute through online, telephone, or face-to-face methods. We assessed sepsis knowledge through a series of questions and the ability to recognize sepsis as an emergency through five case vignettes. To identify predictors of sepsis knowledge and the ability to recognize sepsis as a medical emergency, we conducted multiple linear regressions. RESULTS: Of the 36 items on sepsis knowledge, participants answered less than 50 per cent correctly (mean 44.1%; standard deviation (SD) 20.1). Most patients knew that sepsis is a defensive host response to infection (75.9%), but only 30.8% knew that vaccination can prevent infections that lead to sepsis. Across the five vignettes, participants identified sepsis as an emergency in only 1.33 of all cases on average (SD = 1.27). Sepsis knowledge was higher among participants who were older, female, and more highly educated and who reported more extensive health information seeking behaviour. The ability to recognize sepsis as an emergency was higher among younger participants, participants without chronic diseases, and participants with higher health literacy, but it was not significantly associated with sepsis knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: Risk groups showed low levels of knowledge regarding the preventive importance of vaccination and a low ability to recognize sepsis as a medical emergency. Higher levels of sepsis knowledge alone were not sufficient to improve the ability to identify sepsis as a medical emergency. It is crucial to develop effective educational strategies-especially for persons with lower education levels and infrequent health information seeking behaviour-that not only transfer but also facilitate the choice of appropriate actions, such as seeking timely emergency care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00024561. Registered 9 March 2021.

Estimating Sepsis Incidence Using Administrative Data and Clinical Medical Record Review.

Importance: Despite the large health burden, reliable data on sepsis epidemiology are lacking; studies using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD)-coded hospital discharge diagnosis for sepsis identification suffer from limited sensitivity. Also, ICD data do not allow investigation of underlying pathogens and antimicrobial resistance. Objectives: To generate reliable epidemiological estimates by linking data from a population-based database to a reference standard of clinical medical record review. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective, observational cohort study using a population-based administrative database including all acute care hospitals of the Scania region in Sweden in 2019 and 2020 to identify hospital-treated sepsis cases by ICD codes. From this database, clinical medical records were also selected for review within 6 strata defined by ICD discharge diagnosis (both with and without sepsis diagnosis). Data were analyzed from April to October 2022. Main outcomes and measures: Hospital and population incidences of sepsis, case fatality, antimicrobial resistance, and temporal dynamics due to COVID-19 were assessed, as well as validity of ICD-10 case identification methods compared with the reference standard of clinical medical record review. Results: Out of 295 531 hospitalizations in 2019 in the Scania region of Sweden, 997 patient medical records were reviewed, among which 457 had sepsis according to clinical criteria. Of the patients with clinical sepsis, 232 (51%) were female, and 357 (78%) had at least 1 comorbidity. The median (IQR) age of the cohort was 76 (67-85) years. The incidence of sepsis in hospitalized patients according to the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3) criteria in 2019 was 4.1% (95% CI, 3.6-4.5) by medical record review. This corresponds to an annual incidence rate of 747 (95% CI, 663-832) patients with sepsis per 100 000 population. No significant increase in sepsis during the COVID-19 pandemic nor a decrease in sepsis incidence when excluding COVID-19 sepsis was observed. Few sepsis cases caused by pathogens with antimicrobial resistance were found. The validity of ICD-10-based case identification in administrative data was low. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of sepsis epidemiology, sepsis was a considerable burden to public health in Sweden. Supplying administrative data with information from clinical medical records can help to generate reliable data on sepsis epidemiology.

Return to work after sepsis-a German population-based health claims study.

Background: Long-term impairments after sepsis can impede the return to work in survivors. We aimed to describe rates of return to work 6 and 12 months postsepsis. Methods: This retrospective, population-based cohort study was based on health claims data of the German AOK health insurance of 23.0 million beneficiaries. We included 12-months survivors after hospital-treated sepsis in 2013/2014, who were ≤60 years at the time of the admission and were working in the year presepsis. We assessed the prevalence of return to work (RTW), persistent inability to work and early retirement. Results: Among 7,370 working age sepsis survivors, 69.2% returned to work at 6 months postsepsis, while 22.8% were on sick leave and 8.0% retired early. At 12 months postsepsis, the RTW rate increased to 76.9%, whereas 9.8% were still on sick leave and 13.3% retired early. Survivors who returned to work had a mean of 70 (SD 93) sick leave days in the 12 months presepsis (median 28 days, IQR 108 days). Conclusion: One out of four working age sepsis survivors does not resume work in the year postsepsis. Specific rehabilitation and targeted aftercare may be opportunities to reduce barriers to RTW after sepsis.

Urban-Rural Disparities in Case Fatality of Community-Acquired Sepsis in Germany: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine urban-rural disparities in sepsis case fatality rates among patients with community-acquired sepsis in Germany. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using de-identified data of the nationwide statutory health insurance AOK, covering approx. 30% of the German population. We compared in-hospital- and 12-month case fatality between rural and urban sepsis patients. We calculated odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals and the estimated adjusted odds ratio (ORadj) using logistic regression models to account for potential differences in the distribution of age, comorbidities, and sepsis characteristics between rural and urban citizens. RESULTS: We identified 118,893 hospitalized patients with community-acquired sepsis in 2013-2014 with direct hospital admittance. Sepsis patients from rural areas had lower in-hospital case fatality rates compared to their urban counterparts (23.7% vs. 25.5%, p < 0.001, Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.91 (95% CI 0.88, 0.94), ORadj = 0.89 (95% CI 0.86, 0.92)). Similar differences were observable for 12-month case fatalities (45.8% rural vs. 47.0% urban 12-month case fatality, p < 0.001, OR = 0.95 (95% CI 0.93, 0.98), ORadj = 0.92 (95% CI 0.89, 0.94)). Survival benefits were also observable in rural patients with severe community-acquired sepsis or patients admitted as emergencies. Rural patients of <40 years had half the odds of dying in hospital compared to urban patients in this age bracket (ORadj = 0.49 (95% CI 0.23, 0.75), p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Rural residence is associated with short- and long-term survival benefits in patients with community-acquired sepsis. Further research on patient, community, and health-care system factors is needed to understand the causative mechanisms of these disparities.

Sepsis survivors and caregivers perspectives on post-acute rehabilitation and aftercare in the first year after sepsis in Germany.

Background: Sepsis survivors often suffer from new morbidities. Current rehabilitation therapies are not tailored to their specific needs. The perspective of sepsis survivors and their caregivers on rehabilitation and aftercare is insufficiently understood. We aimed to assess how sepsis survivors in Germany rated the suitability, extent and satisfaction with rehabilitation therapies that they underwent in the year following the acute sepsis episode. Methods: Prospective mixed-methods, multicenter study among a cohort of adult ICU-treated sepsis survivors and their caregivers. Interviews were conducted 6 and 12 months after ICU discharge by telephone and comprised closed as well as open-ended questions. Primary outcomes were the utilization and patient satisfaction with inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation and post-sepsis aftercare in general. Open-ended questions were analyzed according to the principles of content analysis. Results: Foun hundred interviews were performed with 287 patients and/or relatives. At 6 months after sepsis, 85.0% of survivors had applied for and 70.0% had undergone rehabilitation. Among these, 97% received physical therapy, but only a minority reported therapies for specific ailments including pain, weaning from mechanical ventilation, cognitive deficits of fatigue. Survivors were moderately satisfied with the suitability, extent, and overall results of received therapies and perceived deficits in the timeliness, accessibility, and specificity of therapies as well as deficits in the structural support frameworks and patient education. Conclusion: From the perspective of survivors who undergo rehabilitation, therapies should already begin in hospital, be more appropriate for their specific ailments and include better patient and caregiver education. The general aftercare and structural support framework should be improved.

Psychometric properties of the Reintegration to Normal Living Index for sepsis survivors.

PURPOSE: Return to a normal state of living is a key patient-relevant outcome for sepsis survivors. The Reintegration to Normal Living Index (RNLI) assesses self-perceived participation in patients with chronic disease, but its psychometric properties have been analyzed neither for patients after sepsis nor in a German patient cohort. This study aims to analyze the psychometric properties of the German version of the RNLI in sepsis survivors. METHODS: In a prospective multicenter survey study, 287 sepsis survivors were interviewed 6 and 12 months after hospital discharge. Multiple-group categorical confirmatory factor analyses with three competing models were used to explore the factor structure of the RNLI. Concurrent validity was evaluated in relation to the EQ-5D-3L and the Barthel Index of Activities of Daily Living (ADL). RESULTS: Regarding structural validity, all models showed an acceptable model fit. Because of high correlation between the latent variables in the two-factor models (up to r = 0.969) and for reason of parsimony, we opted for the common factor model to analyze the concurrent validity. Our analyses showed moderate positive correlations between RNLI score and ADL score (r ≥ 0.630), EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale (r ≥ 0.656) and EQ-5D-3L utility score (r ≥ 0.548). The reliability assessed by McDonald's Omega was 0.94. CONCLUSION: We found convincing evidence for good reliability, structural and concurrent validity of the RNLI in German sepsis survivors. We propose to use the RNLI in addition to generic health-related quality of life measures to assess the reintegration to normal living after sepsis.

The Effects of Postacute Rehabilitation on Mortality, Chronic Care Dependency, Health Care Use, and Costs in Sepsis Survivors.

Rationale: Sepsis often leads to long-term functional deficits and increased mortality in survivors. Postacute rehabilitation can decrease long-term sepsis mortality, but its impact on nursing care dependency, health care use, and costs is insufficiently understood. Objectives: To assess the short-term (7-12 months postdischarge) and long-term (13-36 months postdischarge) effect of inpatient rehabilitation within 6 months after hospitalization on mortality, nursing care dependency, health care use, and costs. Methods: An observational cohort study used health claims data from the health insurer AOK (Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse). Among 23.0 million AOK beneficiaries, adult beneficiaries hospitalized with sepsis in 2013-2014 were identified by explicit codes from the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision. The study included patients who were nonemployed presepsis, for whom rehabilitation is reimbursed by the AOK and thus included in the dataset, and who survived at least 6 months postdischarge. The effect of rehabilitation was estimated by statistical comparisons of patients with rehabilitation (treatment group) and those without (reference group). Possible differential effects were investigated for the subgroup of ICU-treated sepsis survivors. The study used inverse probability of treatment weighting based on propensity scores to adjust for differences in relevant covariates. Costs for rehabilitation in the 6 months postsepsis were not included in the cost analysis. Results: Among 41,918 6-month sepsis survivors, 17.2% (n = 7,224) received rehabilitation. There was no significant difference in short-term survival between survivors with and without rehabilitation. Long-term survival rates were significantly higher in the rehabilitation group (90.4% vs. 88.7%; odds ratio [OR] = 1.2; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 1.1-1.3; P = 0.003). Survivors with rehabilitation had a higher mean number of hospital readmissions (7-12 months after sepsis: 0.82 vs. 0.76; P = 0.014) and were more frequently dependent on nursing care (7-12 months after sepsis: 47.8% vs. 42.3%; OR = 1.2; 95% CI = 1.2-1.3; P < 0.001; 13-36 months after sepsis: 52.5% vs. 47.5%; OR = 1.2; 95% CI = 1.1-1.3; P < 0.001) compared with those without rehabilitation, whereas total health care costs at 7-36 months after sepsis did not differ between groups. ICU-treated sepsis patients with rehabilitation had higher short- and long-term survival rates (short-term: 93.5% vs. 90.9%; OR = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.2-1.7; P < 0.001; long-term: 89.1% vs. 86.3%; OR = 1.3; 95% CI = 1.1-1.5; P < 0.001) than ICU-treated sepsis patients without rehabilitation. Conclusions: Rehabilitation within the first 6 months after ICU- and non-ICU-treated sepsis is associated with increased long-term survival within 3 years after sepsis without added total health care costs. Future work should aim to confirm and explain these exploratory findings.

Text-Based vs. Graphical Information Formats in Sepsis Prevention and Early Detection: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Informed Choice.

Sepsis is associated with 11 million global deaths annually. Although serious consequences of sepsis can generally be avoided with prevention and early detection, research has not yet addressed the efficacy of evidence-based health information formats for different risk groups. This study examines whether two evidence-based health information formats­text based and graphical­differ in how well they foster informed choice and risk and health literacy and in how well they support different sepsis risk groups. Based on a systematic literature review, two one-page educative formats on sepsis prevention and early detection were designed­one text based and one graphical. A sample of 500 German participants was randomly shown one of the two formats; they were then assessed on whether they made informed choices and on their risk and health literacy. For both formats, >70% of participants made informed choices for sepsis prevention and >75% for early detection. Compared with the graphical format, the text-based format was associated with higher degrees of informed choice (p = 0.012, OR = 1.818) and risk and health literacy (p = 0.032, OR = 1.710). Both formats can foster informed choices and risk and health literacy on sepsis prevention and early detection, but the text-based format appears to be more effective.