Perceptions of Quality of Interprofessional Collaboration, Staff Well-Being and Nonbeneficial Treatment: A Comparison between Nurses and Physicians in Intensive and Palliative Care.

This study assessed differences in interprofessional collaboration, perception of nonbeneficial care, and staff well-being between critical care and palliative care teams. In six German hospitals, a staff survey was conducted between December 2013 and March 2015 among nurses and physicians in intensive and palliative care units. To allow comparability between unit types, a matching was performed for demographic characteristics of staff. N = 313 critical care and 79 palliative care staff participated, of which 72 each were successfully matched. Critical care nurses perceived the poorest overall quality of collaboration compared with critical care physicians and palliative care physicians and nurses. They also reported less inclusive leadership from attendings and head nurses, and the least collaboration on care decisions with physicians. They were most likely to perceive nonbeneficial care, and they reported the lowest levels of job satisfaction and the highest intention to leave the job. In partial correlations, aspects of high-quality collaboration were associated with less perceived nonbeneficial care and higher staff well-being for both critical care and palliative care staff. Our findings indicate that critical care teams could improve collaboration and enhance well-being, particularly among nurses, by adopting principles of collaborative work culture as established in palliative care.

Sepsis and underlying comorbidities in intensive care unit patients : Analysis of the cause of death by different clinicians-a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing debate as to whether death with sepsis is primarily caused by sepsis or, more often, by the underlying disease. There are no data on the influence of a researcher's background on such an assessment. Therefore, the aim of this analysis was to assess the cause of death in sepsis and the influence of an investigator's professional background on such an assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational cohort study of sepsis patients treated in the medical intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary care center. For deceased patients, comorbidities and severity of illness were documented. The cause of death (sepsis or comorbidities or both combined) was independently assessed by four assessors with different professional backgrounds (medical student, senior physician in the medical ICU, anesthesiological intensivist, and senior physician specialized in the predominant comorbidity). RESULTS: In all, 78 of 235 patients died in hospital. Agreement between assessors about cause of death was low (κ 0.37, 95% confidence interval 0.29-0.44). Depending on the assessor, sepsis was the sole cause of death in 6-12% of cases, sepsis and comorbidities in 54-76%, and comorbidities alone in 18-40%. CONCLUSIONS: In a relevant proportion of patients with sepsis treated in the medical ICU, comorbidities contribute significantly to mortality, and death from sepsis without relevant comorbidities is a rare event. Designation of the cause of death in sepsis patients is highly subjective and may be influenced by the professional background of the assessor.

The German Quality Network Sepsis: Evaluation of a Quality Collaborative on Decreasing Sepsis-Related Mortality in a Controlled Interrupted Time Series Analysis.

Background: Sepsis is one of the leading causes of preventable deaths in hospitals. This study presents the evaluation of a quality collaborative, which aimed to decrease sepsis-related hospital mortality. Methods: The German Quality Network Sepsis (GQNS) offers quality reporting based on claims data, peer reviews, and support for establishing continuous quality management and staff education. This study evaluates the effects of participating in the GQNS during the intervention period (April 2016-June 2018) in comparison to a retrospective baseline (January 2014-March 2016). The primary outcome was all-cause risk-adjusted hospital mortality among cases with sepsis. Sepsis was identified by International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes in claims data. A controlled time series analysis was conducted to analyze changes from the baseline to the intervention period comparing GQNS hospitals with the population of all German hospitals assessed via the national diagnosis-related groups (DRGs)-statistics. Tests were conducted using piecewise hierarchical models. Implementation processes and barriers were assessed by surveys of local leaders of quality improvement teams. Results: Seventy-four hospitals participated, of which 17 were university hospitals and 18 were tertiary care facilities. Observed mortality was 43.5% during baseline period and 42.7% during intervention period. Interrupted time-series analyses did not show effects on course or level of risk-adjusted mortality of cases with sepsis compared to the national DRG-statistics after the beginning of the intervention period (p = 0.632 and p = 0.512, respectively). There was no significant mortality decrease in the subgroups of patients with septic shock or ventilation >24 h or predefined subgroups of hospitals. A standardized survey among 49 local quality improvement leaders in autumn of 2018 revealed that most hospitals did not succeed in implementing a continuous quality management program or relevant measures to improve early recognition and treatment of sepsis. Barriers perceived most commonly were lack of time (77.6%), staff shortage (59.2%), and lack of participation of relevant departments (38.8%). Conclusion: As long as hospital-wide sepsis quality improvement efforts will not become a high priority for the hospital leadership by assuring adequate resources and involvement of all pertinent stakeholders, voluntary initiatives to improve the quality of sepsis care will remain prone to failure.

A multifaceted educational intervention improved anti-infectious measures but had no effect on mortality in patients with severe sepsis.

Sepsis is a major reason for preventable hospital deaths. A cluster-randomized controlled trial on an educational intervention did not show improvements of sepsis management or outcome. We now aimed to test an improved implementation strategy in a second intervention phase in which new intervention hospitals (former controls) received a multifaceted educational intervention, while controls (former intervention hospitals) only received feedback of quality indicators. Changes in outcomes from the first to the second intervention phase were compared between groups using hierarchical generalized linear models controlling for possible confounders. During the two phases, 19 control hospitals included 4050 patients with sepsis and 21 intervention hospitals included 2526 patients. 28-day mortality did not show significant changes between study phases in both groups. The proportion of patients receiving antimicrobial therapy within one hour increased in intervention hospitals, but not in control hospitals. Taking at least two sets of blood cultures increased significantly in both groups. During phase 2, intervention hospitals showed higher proportion of adequate initial antimicrobial therapy and de-escalation within 5 days. A survey among involved clinicians indicated lacking resources for quality improvement. Therefore, quality improvement programs should include all elements of sepsis guidelines and provide hospitals with sufficient resources for quality improvement.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01187134. Registered 23 August 2010, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT01187134 .

Adverse effects of delayed antimicrobial treatment and surgical source control in adults with sepsis: results of a planned secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Timely antimicrobial treatment and source control are strongly recommended by sepsis guidelines, however, their impact on clinical outcomes is uncertain. METHODS: We performed a planned secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized trial conducted from July 2011 to May 2015 including forty German hospitals. All adult patients with sepsis treated in the participating ICUs were included. Primary exposures were timing of antimicrobial therapy and delay of surgical source control during the first 48 h after sepsis onset. Primary endpoint was 28-day mortality. Mixed models were used to investigate the effects of timing while adjusting for confounders. The linearity of the effect was investigated by fractional polynomials and by categorizing of timing. RESULTS: Analyses were based on 4792 patients receiving antimicrobial treatment and 1595 patients undergoing surgical source control. Fractional polynomial analysis identified a linear effect of timing of antimicrobials on 28-day mortality, which increased by 0.42% per hour delay (OR with 95% CI 1.019 [1.01, 1.028], p ≤ 0.001). This effect was significant in patients with and without shock (OR = 1.018 [1.008, 1.029] and 1.026 [1.01, 1.043], respectively). Using a categorized timing variable, there were no significant differences comparing treatment within 1 h versus 1-3 h, or 1 h versus 3-6 h. Delays of more than 6 h significantly increased mortality (OR = 1.41 [1.17, 1.69]). Delay in antimicrobials also increased risk of progression from severe sepsis to septic shock (OR per hour: 1.051 [1.022, 1.081], p ≤ 0.001). Time to surgical source control was significantly associated with decreased odds of successful source control (OR = 0.982 [0.971, 0.994], p = 0.003) and increased odds of death (OR = 1.011 [1.001, 1.021]; p = 0.03) in unadjusted analysis, but not when adjusted for confounders (OR = 0.991 [0.978, 1.005] and OR = 1.008 [0.997, 1.02], respectively). Only, among patients with septic shock delay of source control was significantly related to risk-of death (adjusted OR = 1.013 [1.001, 1.026], p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that management of sepsis is time critical both for antimicrobial therapy and source control. Also patients, who are not yet in septic shock, profit from early anti-infective treatment since it can prevent further deterioration. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01187134 ). Registered 23 August 2010, NCT01187134.

Risk Factors for Invasive Candida Infection in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend empirical antifungal therapy in patients with sepsis with high risk of invasive Candida infection. However, many different risk factors have been derived from multiple studies. These risk factors lack specificity, and broad application would render most ICU patients eligible for empirical antifungal therapy. RESEARCH QUESTION: What risk factors for invasive Candida infection can be identified by a systematic review and meta-analysis? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Biomed Central, and Cochrane and extracted the raw and adjusted OR for each risk factor associated with invasive Candida infection. We calculated pooled ORs for risk factors present in more than one study. RESULTS: We included 34 studies in our meta-analysis resulting in the assessment of 29 possible risk factors. Risk factors for invasive Candida infection included demographic factors, comorbid conditions, and medical interventions. Although demographic factors do not play a role for the development of invasive Candida infection, comorbid conditions (eg, HIV, Candida colonization) and medical interventions have a significant impact. The risk factors associated with the highest risk for invasive Candida infection were broad-spectrum antibiotics (OR, 5.6; 95% CI, 3.6-8.8), blood transfusion (OR, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.5-16.3), Candida colonization (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.6-14.3), central venous catheter (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 2.7-8.1), and total parenteral nutrition (OR, 4.6; 95% CI, 3.3-6.3). However, dependence between the various risk factors is probably high. INTERPRETATION: Our systematic review and meta-analysis identified patient- and treatment-related factors that were associated with the risk for the development of invasive Candida infection in the ICU. Most of the factors identified were either related to medical interventions during intensive care or to comorbid conditions.

Towards an ecological definition of sepsis: a viewpoint.

In critically ill patients with sepsis, there is a grave lack of effective treatment options to address the illness-defining inappropriate host response. Currently, treatment is limited to source control and supportive care, albeit with imminent approval of immune modulating drugs for COVID-19-associated lung failure the potential of host-directed strategies appears on the horizon. We suggest expanding the concept of sepsis by incorporating infectious stress within the general stress response of the cell to define sepsis as an illness state characterized by allostatic overload and failing adaptive responses along with biotic (pathogen) and abiotic (e.g., malnutrition) environmental stress factors. This would allow conceptualizing the failing organismic responses to pathogens in sepsis with an ancient response pattern depending on the energy state of cells and organs towards other environmental stressors in general. Hence, the present review aims to decipher the heuristic value of a biological definition of sepsis as a failing stress response. These considerations may motivate a better understanding of the processes underlying "host defense failure" on the organismic, organ, cell and molecular levels.

Fever and hypothermia represent two populations of sepsis patients and are associated with outside temperature.

BACKGROUND: Fever and hypothermia have been observed in septic patients. Their influence on prognosis is subject to ongoing debates. METHODS: We did a secondary analysis of a large clinical dataset from a quality improvement trial. A binary logistic regression model was calculated to assess the association of the thermal response with outcome and a multinomial regression model to assess factors associated with fever or hypothermia. RESULTS: With 6542 analyzable cases we observed a bimodal temperature response characterized by fever or hypothermia, normothermia was rare. Hypothermia and high fever were both associated with higher lactate values. Hypothermia was associated with higher mortality, but this association was reduced after adjustment for other risk factors. Age, community-acquired sepsis, lower BMI and lower outside temperatures were associated with hypothermia while bacteremia and higher procalcitonin values were associated with high fever. CONCLUSIONS: Septic patients show either a hypothermic or a fever response. Whether hypothermia is a maladaptive response, as indicated by the higher mortality in hypothermic patients, or an adaptive response in patients with limited metabolic reserves under colder environmental conditions, remains an open question. Trial registration The original trial whose dataset was analyzed was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01187134) on August 23, 2010, the first patient was included on July 1, 2011.

Comparing the validity of different ICD coding abstraction strategies for sepsis case identification in German claims data.

INTRODUCTION: Administrative data are used to generate estimates of sepsis epidemiology and can serve as source for quality indicators. Aim was to compare estimates on sepsis incidence and mortality based on different ICD-code abstraction strategies and to assess their validity for sepsis case identification based on a patient sample not pre-selected for presence of sepsis codes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the national DRG-statistics for assessment of population-level sepsis incidence and mortality. Cases were identified by three previously published International Statistical Classification of Diseases (ICD) coding strategies for sepsis based on primary and secondary discharge diagnoses (clinical sepsis codes (R-codes), explicit coding (all sepsis codes) and implicit coding (combined infection and organ dysfunction codes)). For the validation study, a stratified sample of 1120 adult patients admitted to a German academic medical center between 2007-2013 was selected. Administrative diagnoses were compared to a gold standard of clinical sepsis diagnoses based on manual chart review. RESULTS: In the validation study, 151/937 patients had sepsis. Explicit coding strategies performed better regarding sensitivity compared to R-codes, but had lower PPV. The implicit approach was the most sensitive for severe sepsis; however, it yielded a considerable number of false positives. R-codes and explicit strategies underestimate sepsis incidence by up to 3.5-fold. Between 2007-2013, national sepsis incidence ranged between 231-1006/100,000 person-years depending on the coding strategy. CONCLUSIONS: In the sample of a large tertiary care hospital, ICD-coding strategies for sepsis differ in their accuracy. Estimates using R-codes are likely to underestimate the true sepsis incidence, whereas implicit coding overestimates sepsis cases. Further multi-center evaluation is needed to gain better understanding on the validity of sepsis coding in Germany.

Influence of pathogen and focus of infection on procalcitonin values in sepsis patients with bacteremia or candidemia.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of procalcitonin (PCT) serum concentrations to diagnose Gram-negative bacteremia and the association of PCT serum concentrations with more specific pathogens and the focus of infection. METHODS: Secondary analysis of the prospectively collected patient-level dataset from a cluster randomized quality improvement trial was performed. The trial included sepsis patients with organ dysfunction treated in the participating intensive care units from 2011 to 2015. Test performance for the prediction of Gram-negative bacteremia was assessed by receiver operating curve analysis. Independent effects of specific pathogen groups and foci of infection on PCT concentrations were assessed by linear logistic regression models. RESULTS: Blood cultures (BC) and PCT concentrations had been taken in 4858 of 6561 documented patients. PCT was significantly higher in Gram-negative bacteremia compared to Gram-positive bacteremia or candidemia (p < 0.001). The area under the curve was 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.71-0.74) for the prediction of Gram-negative bacteremia compared to all other blood culture results including negative blood cultures. The optimized cutoff value was 10 ng/ml (sensitivity 69%, specificity 35%). PCT differed significantly between specific groups of pathogens (p < 0.001) with highest concentrations in Escherichia coli, Streptococcus species and other Enterobacteriaceae. PCT was highest in urogenital followed by abdominal infection and lowest in respiratory infection (p < 0.001). In a linear regression model, Streptococci, E. coli and other Enterobacteriaceae detected from BC were associated with three times higher PCT values. Urogenital or abdominal foci of infection were associated with twofold increased PCT values independent of the pathogen. CONCLUSIONS: Serum PCT concentrations are higher in patients with Gram-negative bacteremia than in patients with Gram-positive bacteremia or candidemia. However, the discriminatory power of this difference is too low to guide therapeutic decisions. Variations in PCT serum concentrations are not determined solely by Gram-negative or Gram-positive bacteria but are also affected by distinct groups of pathogens and different foci of infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01187134 . Registered on 23 August 2010.

A risk-model for hospital mortality among patients with severe sepsis or septic shock based on German national administrative claims data.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a major cause of preventable deaths in hospitals. Feasible and valid methods for comparing quality of sepsis care between hospitals are needed. The aim of this study was to develop a risk-adjustment model suitable for comparing sepsis-related mortality between German hospitals. METHODS: We developed a risk-model using national German claims data. Since these data are available with a time-lag of 1.5 years only, the stability of the model across time was investigated. The model was derived from inpatient cases with severe sepsis or septic shock treated in 2013 using logistic regression with backward selection and generalized estimating equations to correct for clustering. It was validated among cases treated in 2015. Finally, the model development was repeated in 2015. To investigate secular changes, the risk-adjusted trajectory of mortality across the years 2010-2015 was analyzed. RESULTS: The 2013 deviation sample consisted of 113,750 cases; the 2015 validation sample consisted of 134,851 cases. The model developed in 2013 showed good validity regarding discrimination (AUC = 0.74), calibration (observed mortality in 1st and 10th risk-decile: 11%-78%), and fit (R2 = 0.16). Validity remained stable when the model was applied to 2015 (AUC = 0.74, 1st and 10th risk-decile: 10%-77%, R2 = 0.17). There was no indication of overfitting of the model. The final model developed in year 2015 contained 40 risk-factors. Between 2010 and 2015 hospital mortality in sepsis decreased from 48% to 42%. Adjusted for risk-factors the trajectory of decrease was still significant. CONCLUSIONS: The risk-model shows good predictive validity and stability across time. The model is suitable to be used as an external algorithm for comparing risk-adjusted sepsis mortality among German hospitals or regions based on administrative claims data, but secular changes need to be taken into account when interpreting risk-adjusted mortality.

Perceived Nonbeneficial Treatment of Patients, Burnout, and Intention to Leave the Job Among ICU Nurses and Junior and Senior Physicians.

OBJECTIVES: Perceiving nonbeneficial treatment is stressful for ICU staff and may be associated with burnout. We aimed to investigate predictors and consequences of perceived nonbeneficial treatment and to compare nurses and junior and senior physicians. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, multicenter paper-pencil survey on personal and work-related characteristics, perceived nonbeneficial treatment, burnout, and intention to leave the job. SETTING: Convenience sample of 23 German ICUs. SUBJECTS: ICU nurses and physicians. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 847 questionnaires were returned (51% response); 778 had complete data for final multivariate analyses. Nonbeneficial treatment was in median perceived "sometimes." Adjusted for covariates, it was perceived more often by nurses and junior physicians (both p ≤ 0.001 in comparison to senior physicians), while emotional exhaustion was highest in junior physicians (p ≤ 0.015 in comparison to senior physicians and nurses), who also had a higher intention to leave than nurses (p = 0.024). Nonbeneficial treatment was predicted by high workload and low quality collaboration with other departments (both p ≤ 0.001). Poor nurse-physician collaboration predicted perception of nonbeneficial treatment among junior physicians and nurses (both p ≤ 0.001) but not among senior physicians (p = 0.753). Nonbeneficial treatment was independently associated with the core burnout dimension emotional exhaustion (p ≤ 0.001), which significantly mediated the effect between nonbeneficial treatment and intention to leave (indirect effect: 0.11 [95% CI, 0.06-0.18]). CONCLUSIONS: Perceiving nonbeneficial treatment is related to burnout and may increase intention to leave. Efforts to reduce perception of nonbeneficial treatment should improve the work environment and should be tailored to the different experiences of nurses and junior and senior physicians.