Models to predict bacteremia in the emergency department: a systematic review. / Modelos predictivos de bacteriemia en el servicio de urgencias: revisión sistemática.

OBJECTIVES: Blood cultures are ordered in emergency departments for 15% of patients with suspected infection. The diagnostic yield varies from 2% to 20%. Thirty-day mortality in patients with bacteremia is high, doubling or tripling the rate in patients with the same infection but without bacteremia. Thus, finding an effective model to predict bacteremia that is applicable in emergency departments is an important goal. Shapiro's model is the one traditionally used as a reference internationally. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the predictive power of bacteremia risk models published since 2008, when Shapiro's model first appeared. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We followed the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, searching in the following databases for articles published between January 2008 and May 31, 2023: PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Lilacs, Cochrane, Epistemonikos, Trip Medical Database, and ClinicalTrials.gov. No language restrictions were specified. The search terms were the following Medical Subject Headings: bacteremia/bacteraemia/blood stream infection, prediction model/clinical prediction rule/risk prediction model, emergencies/emergency/emergency department, and adults. Observational cohort studies analyzing diagnostic yield were included; case-control studies, narrative reviews, and other types of articles were excluded. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to score quality and risk of bias in the included studies. The results were compared descriptively, without meta-analysis. The protocol was included in the PROSPERO register (CRD42023426327). RESULTS: Twenty studies out of a total of 917 were found to meet the inclusion criteria. The included studies together analyzed 33 182 blood cultures, which detected 5074 cases of bacteremia (15.3%). Eleven studies were of high quality, 7 of moderate quality, and 2 of low quality. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of Shapiro's model varied from 0.71 to 0.83. Sensitivity was as high as 98%, and specificity ranged from 26% to 69%. Three models with high scores for quality were also supported by both internal and external validation studies: Lee's model (AUC, 0.81; sensitivity 68%; specificity, 81%), the 5MPB-Toledo model (AUC, 0.906 to 0.946), and the MPB-INFURG-SEMES model (AUC, 0.924; sensitivity, 97%; specificity, 76%. CONCLUSION: The 5MPB-Toledo and MPB-INFURG-SEMES are useful for assessing the true risk of bacteremia in patients attended in emergency departments.

OBJETIVO: La obtención de hemocultivos (HC) se realiza en el 15% de los pacientes atendidos con sospecha de infección en los servicios de urgencias (SU) con una rentabilidad diagnóstica variable (2-20%). La mortalidad a 30 días de estos pacientes con bacteriemia es elevada, doble o triple que el resto con el mismo proceso. Así, encontrar un modelo predictivo de bacteriemia eficaz y aplicable en los SU sería muy importante. Clásicamente, el modelo de Shapiro ha sido la referencia en todo el mundo. El objetivo de esta revisión sistemática (RS) es comparar la capacidad para predecir bacteriemia en los SU de los distintos modelos predictivos publicados desde el año 2008 (fecha de publicación del modelo de Shapiro). METODO: Se realiza una RS siguiendo la normativa PRISMA en las bases de datos de PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Lilacs, Cochrane, Epistemonikos, Tripdatabase y ClinicalTrials.gov desde enero de 2008 hasta 31 mayo 2023 sin restricción de idiomas y utilizando una combinación de términos MESH: "Bacteremia/Bacteraemia/Blood Stream Infection", "Prediction Model/Clinical Prediction Rule/Risk Prediction Model", "Emergencies/Emergency/Emergency Department" y "Adults". Se incluyeron estudios de cohortes observacionales (analíticos de rendimiento diagnóstico). Para valorar la calidad del método empleado y el riesgo de sesgos de los artículos incluidos se utilizó la Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). No se incluyeron estudios de casos y controles, revisiones narrativas y en otros tipos de artículos. No se realizaron técnicas de metanálisis, pero los resultados se compararon narrativamente. El protocolo de la RS se registró en PROSPERO (CRD42023426327). RESULTADOS: Se identificaron 917 artículos y se analizaron finalmente 20 que cumplían los criterios de inclusión. Los estudios incluidos contienen 33.182 HC procesados con 5.074 bacteriemias (15,3%). Once estudios fueron calificados de calidad alta, 7 moderada y 2 baja. El ABC-COR conseguida por el modelo de Shapiro varía de 0,71 a 0,83, con sensibilidad (Se) hasta del 98%, con especificidad (Es) (26% a 69%). Para los tres modelos que tienen validación interna y externa y una buena calidad metodológica, el modelo de Lee consigue un ABC-COR de 0,81 con Se: 68% y Es: 81%, el modelo 5MPB-Toledo consigue un ABC-COR entre 0,91 y 0,95, y el MPB-INFURG-SEMES obtiene una ABC-COR de 0,92 con una Se: 97% y Es: 76%. CONCLUSIONES: Los modelos 5MPB-Toledo y MPB-INFURG-SEMES representan herramientas útiles para la estratificación del riesgo real de bacteriemia en los pacientes atendidos en los SU.

The Guadalajara Declaration on sepsis: emergency physicians' constructive comments on the Surviving Sepsis Campaign's 2021 updated guidelines. / Declaración de Guadalajara: una visión constructiva desde el servicio de urgencias a partir de la Surviving Sepsis Campaign 2021.

TEXT: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) published a 2021 update of its 2016 recommendations. The update was awaited with great anticipation the world over, especially by emergency physicians. Under the framework of the CIMU 2022 (33rd World Emergency Medicine Conference) in Guadalajara, Mexico in March, emergency physiciansreviewed and analyzed the 2021 SSC guidelines from our specialty's point of view. In this article, the expert reviewers present their consensus on certain key points of most interest in emergency settings at this time. The main aims of the review are to present constructive comments on 10 key points and/or recommendations in the SSC 2021 update and to offer emergency physicians' experience- and evidence-based proposals. Secondarily, the review's recommendations are a starting point for guidelines to detect severe sepsis in emergency department patients and prevent progression, which is ultimate goal of what has become known as the Guadalajara Declaration on sepsis.

TEXTO: En noviembre del año 2021, la Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) publicó una actualización de sus recomendaciones y directrices de 2016. Estas fueron recibidas con una enorme expectativa en todo el mundo, especialmente entre los médicos de urgencias y emergencias (MUE). Recientemente, en el marco del CIMU 2022 (33 Congreso Mundial de Medicina de Urgencias celebrado en marzo de 2022 en Guadalajara ­ México) se ha revisado y analizado, desde la perspectiva del MUE, la Guía SSC de 2021. Los expertos que realizaron esa tarea y también consensuaron algunos de los puntos clave que más interesan y preocupan a los MUE en la actualidad han elaborado este documento. Su objetivo principal es analizar de forma constructiva diez de los puntos clave y recomendaciones de la SSC 2021 para complementarlas con argumentos y propuestas desde la experiencia, evidencia y perspectiva del urgenciólogo. Además, de forma secundaria, pretende ser el punto de partida de la elaboración de las guías para detectar, prevenir la progresión y atender a los pacientes con infección grave y sepsis en urgencias, que supone la meta final de lo que desde la MUE ya se conoce como "la Declaración de Guadalajara".

Aggression, Micro-aggression, and Abuse Against Health Care Providers During the COVID-19 Pandemic. A Latin American Survey.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had tremendous consequences globally. Notably, increasing complaints of verbal and physical violence against health care providers have been reported. A cross-sectional electronic survey was conducted between January 11 and February 28, 2022 to delineate the violent behavior against front-line health professionals in Latin America. A total of 3544 participants from 19 countries were included. There were 58.5% women, 70.8% were physicians, 16% were nurses, and 13.2% were other health team members. About 54.8% reported acts of abuse: 95.6% verbal abuse, 11.1% physical abuse, and 19.9% other types. Nearly half of those who reported abuse experienced psychosomatic symptoms after the event, 56.2% considered changing their care tasks, and 33.6% considered quitting their profession. In a logistic regression model, nurses (odds ratio (OR) 1.90, P < 0.001), doctors (OR 2.11, P < 0.001), and administrative staff (OR 3.53, P = 0.005) experienced more abuse than other health workers. Women more frequently reported abuse (OR 1.56, P < 0.001), as well as those who worked directly with COVID-19 patients (OR 3.66, P < 0.001). A lower probability of abuse was observed at older ages (OR 0.95, P < 0.001). There has been a high prevalence of abuse against health personnel in Latin America during the COVID-19 pandemic. Those caring for COVID-19 patients, younger staff, and women were found to be at elevated risk. It is imperative to develop strategies to mitigate these acts and their repercussions on the patient-provider relationship and outcomes.