Delays to Antibiotics in the Emergency Department and Risk of Mortality in Children With Sepsis.

Importance: Pediatric consensus guidelines recommend antibiotic administration within 1 hour for septic shock and within 3 hours for sepsis without shock. Limited studies exist identifying a specific time past which delays in antibiotic administration are associated with worse outcomes. Objective: To determine a time point for antibiotic administration that is associated with increased risk of mortality among pediatric patients with sepsis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data from 51 US children's hospitals in the Improving Pediatric Sepsis Outcomes collaborative. Participants included patients aged 29 days to less than 18 years with sepsis recognized within 1 hour of emergency department arrival, from January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2021. Piecewise regression was used to identify the inflection point for sepsis-attributable 3-day mortality, and logistic regression was used to evaluate odds of sepsis-attributable mortality after adjustment for potential confounders. Data analysis was performed from March 2022 to February 2024. Exposure: The number of minutes from emergency department arrival to antibiotic administration. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was sepsis-attributable 3-day mortality. Sepsis-attributable 30-day mortality was a secondary outcome. Results: A total of 19 515 cases (median [IQR] age, 6 [2-12] years) were included. The median (IQR) time to antibiotic administration was 69 (47-116) minutes. The estimated time to antibiotic administration at which 3-day sepsis-attributable mortality increased was 330 minutes. Patients who received an antibiotic in less than 330 minutes (19 164 patients) had sepsis-attributable 3-day mortality of 0.5% (93 patients) and 30-day mortality of 0.9% (163 patients). Patients who received antibiotics at 330 minutes or later (351 patients) had 3-day sepsis-attributable mortality of 1.2% (4 patients), 30-day mortality of 2.0% (7 patients), and increased adjusted odds of mortality at both 3 days (odds ratio, 3.44; 95% CI, 1.20-9.93; P = .02) and 30 days (odds ratio, 3.63; 95% CI, 1.59-8.30; P = .002) compared with those who received antibiotics within 330 minutes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort of pediatric patients with sepsis, 3-day and 30-day sepsis-attributable mortality increased with delays in antibiotic administration 330 minutes or longer from emergency department arrival. These findings are consistent with the literature demonstrating increased pediatric sepsis mortality associated with antibiotic administration delay. To guide the balance of appropriate resource allocation with time for adequate diagnostic evaluation, further research is needed into whether there are subpopulations, such as those with shock or bacteremia, that may benefit from earlier antibiotics.

Association Between the First-Hour Intravenous Fluid Volume and Mortality in Pediatric Septic Shock.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the receipt of more than or equal to 30 mL/kg of intravenous fluid in the first hour after emergency department (ED) arrival is associated with sepsis-attributable mortality among children with hypotensive septic shock. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study set in 57 EDs in the Improving Pediatric Sepsis Outcomes quality improvement collaborative. Patients less than 18 years of age with hypotensive septic shock who received their first intravenous fluid bolus within 1 hour of arrival at the ED were propensity-score matched for probability of receiving more than or equal to 30 mL/kg in the first hour. Sepsis-attributable mortality was compared. We secondarily evaluated the association between the first-hour fluid volume and sepsis-attributable mortality in all children with suspected sepsis in the first hour after arrival at the ED, regardless of blood pressure. RESULTS: Of the 1,982 subjects who had hypotensive septic shock and received a first fluid bolus within 1 hour of arrival at the ED, 1,204 subjects were propensity matched. In the matched patients receiving more than or equal to 30 mL/kg of fluid, 26 (4.3%) of 602 subjects had 30-day sepsis-attributable mortality compared with 25 (4.2%) of 602 receiving less than 30 mL/kg (odds ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.83). Among the patients with suspected sepsis regardless of blood pressure, 30-day sepsis-attributable mortality was 3.0% in those receiving more than or equal to 30 mL/kg versus 2.0% in those receiving less than 30 ml/kg (odds ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 2.44.) CONCLUSION: In children with hypotensive septic shock receiving a timely first fluid bolus within the first hour of ED care, receiving more than or equal to 30 mL/kg of bolus intravenous fluids in the first hour after arrival at the ED was not associated with mortality compared with receiving less than 30 mL/kg.

Improving Depression Screening in Primary Care: A Quality Improvement Initiative.

The increase in depression during the COVID-19 pandemic underscores the importance of systematic approaches to identify individuals with mental health concerns. Primary care is often underutilized for depression screening, and it is not clear how practices can successfully increase screening rates. This study describes a quality improvement initiative to increase depression screening in five Family Medicine clinics. The initiative included four Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles that resulted in implementing a standardized workflow for depression screening, collaborative efforts with health information technology to prompt providers to perform screening via the medical record, delivering educational materials for providers and clinic staff and conducting follow-up education. Between September 2020 and April 2021 there were 23,745 clinic encounters with adult patients that were analyzed to determine whether patients were up-to-date on depression screening following their visit. A multi-level logistic regression model was constructed to determine the changes in likelihood of a patient being up-to-date on screening over the study period, while controlling for patient demographics and comorbidities. The average proportion of up-to-date patients increased from 61.03% in September 2020 to 82.33% in April 2021. Patients aged 65+ and patients with comorbidities were more likely to be up-to-date on screening; patients with telemedicine visits had lower odds of being up-to-date on depression screening. Overall, this paper describes a feasible, effective intervention to increase depression screening in a primary care setting. Additionally, we discuss lessons learned and recommendations to inform the design of future interventions.

Engaging Family Medicine Residents in a Structured Patient Panel Reassignment Process.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The patient panels of graduating residents must be reassigned by the end of residency. This process affects over 1 million patients annually within the specialty of family medicine. The purpose of this project was to implement a structured, year-end reassignment system in a family medicine residency program. METHODS: Our structured reassignment process took place from December 2017 through June 2020. Panel lists of current, active patients were generated and residents were responsible for reassigning their own panels during a panel reassignment night. We created a tip sheet that addressed patient complexity and continuity, a risk stratification algorithm based on patients' medical and social complexity, and a tool that tracked the number of patients assigned to each future provider. Outcome measures included a resident satisfaction survey administered in 2018-2020 and patient-provider continuity measured with a run chart from December 2016 through August 2020. RESULTS: The resident survey response rate was 75%. Seventy-three percent felt the panel reassignment night was very helpful; 87% thought the reassignment timeline was extremely reasonable, and 87% indicated that they had the necessary information to reassign their patients. Residents also felt confident that their patients were reassigned appropriately (33% extremely confident, 67% somewhat confident). Patient continuity improved with a 13-point run above the median, indicating nonrandom variation. Patient continuity remained above the median until the impact of COVID-19 in April 2020. CONCLUSION: Our structured reassignment process was received positively by residents and resulted in improved patient continuity.