Availability of resources to treat sepsis in Brazil: a random sample of Brazilian institutions. / Disponibilidade de recursos para tratamento da sepse no Brasil: uma amostra aleatória de instituições brasileiras.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize resource availability from a nationally representative random sample of intensive care units in Brazil. METHODS: A structured online survey of participating units in the Sepsis PREvalence Assessment Database (SPREAD) study, a nationwide 1-day point prevalence survey to assess the burden of sepsis in Brazil, was sent to the medical director of each unit. RESULTS: A representative sample of 277 of the 317 invited units responded to the resources survey. Most of the hospitals had fewer than 500 beds (94.6%) with a median of 14 beds in the intensive care unit. Providing care for public-insured patients was the main source of income in two-thirds of the surveyed units. Own microbiology laboratory was not available for 26.8% of the surveyed intensive care units, and 10.5% did not always have access to blood cultures. Broad spectrum antibiotics were not always available in 10.5% of surveyed units, and 21.3% could not always measure lactate within three hours. Those institutions with a high resource availability (158 units, 57%) were usually larger and preferentially served patients from the private health system compared to institutions without high resource availability. Otherwise, those without high resource availability did not always have broad-spectrum antibiotics (24.4%), vasopressors (4.2%) or crystalloids (7.6%). CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that a relevant number of units cannot perform basic monitoring and therapeutic interventions in septic patients. Our results highlight major opportunities for improvement to adhere to simple but effective interventions in Brazil.

OBJETIVO: Caracterizar a disponibilidade de recursos a partir de amostra aleatória representativa das unidades de terapia intensiva do Brasil. MÉTODOS: Realizou-se um questionário estruturado on-line para ser respondido pelo diretor médico de cada unidade participante do estudo SPREAD (Sepsis PREvalence Assessment Database), um estudo de prevalência de um único dia para avaliar o ônus da sepse no Brasil. RESULTADOS: Uma amostra representativa de 277 das 317 unidades convidadas participou por meio de resposta ao questionário estruturado. Em sua maior parte, os hospitais participantes tinham menos que 500 leitos (94,6%), com mediana de 14 leitos na unidade de terapia intensiva. A principal fonte de recursos financeiros para dois terços das unidades pesquisadas era o atendimento de pacientes do sistema público de saúde. Não havia disponibilidade de laboratório de microbiologia próprio em 26,8% das unidades de terapia intensiva pesquisadas, e 10,5% geralmente não tinham acesso à realização de hemoculturas. Em 10,5% das unidades pesquisadas geralmente não estavam disponíveis antibióticos de amplo espectro, e 21,3% das unidades geralmente não podiam obter mensurações de lactato dentro de 3 horas. As instituições com alta disponibilidade de recursos (158 unidades; 57%) eram, em geral, maiores e atendiam principalmente pacientes do sistema de saúde privado. As unidades sem alta disponibilidade de recursos geralmente não dispunham de antibióticos de amplo espectro (24,4%), vasopressores (4,2%) e cristaloides (7,6%). CONCLUSÃO: Um número importante de unidades não tem condições para realizar intervenções básicas de monitoramento e terapêutica em pacientes sépticos. Nossos resultados salientam importantes oportunidades que o Brasil tem para melhorar, em termos de adesão a intervenções simples, porém eficazes.

Disponibilidade de recursos para tratamento da sepse no Brasil: uma amostra aleatória de instituições brasileiras / Availability of resources to treat sepsis in Brazil: a random sample of Brazilian institutions

RESUMO Objetivo: Caracterizar a disponibilidade de recursos a partir de amostra aleatória representativa das unidades de terapia intensiva do Brasil. Métodos: Realizou-se um questionário estruturado on-line para ser respondido pelo diretor médico de cada unidade participante do estudo SPREAD (Sepsis PREvalence Assessment Database), um estudo de prevalência de um único dia para avaliar o ônus da sepse no Brasil. Resultados: Uma amostra representativa de 277 das 317 unidades convidadas participou por meio de resposta ao questionário estruturado. Em sua maior parte, os hospitais participantes tinham menos que 500 leitos (94,6%), com mediana de 14 leitos na unidade de terapia intensiva. A principal fonte de recursos financeiros para dois terços das unidades pesquisadas era o atendimento de pacientes do sistema público de saúde. Não havia disponibilidade de laboratório de microbiologia próprio em 26,8% das unidades de terapia intensiva pesquisadas, e 10,5% geralmente não tinham acesso à realização de hemoculturas. Em 10,5% das unidades pesquisadas geralmente não estavam disponíveis antibióticos de amplo espectro, e 21,3% das unidades geralmente não podiam obter mensurações de lactato dentro de 3 horas. As instituições com alta disponibilidade de recursos (158 unidades; 57%) eram, em geral, maiores e atendiam principalmente pacientes do sistema de saúde privado. As unidades sem alta disponibilidade de recursos geralmente não dispunham de antibióticos de amplo espectro (24,4%), vasopressores (4,2%) e cristaloides (7,6%). Conclusão: Um número importante de unidades não tem condições para realizar intervenções básicas de monitoramento e terapêutica em pacientes sépticos. Nossos resultados salientam importantes oportunidades que o Brasil tem para melhorar, em termos de adesão a intervenções simples, porém eficazes.

ABSTRACT Objective: To characterize resource availability from a nationally representative random sample of intensive care units in Brazil. Methods: A structured online survey of participating units in the Sepsis PREvalence Assessment Database (SPREAD) study, a nationwide 1-day point prevalence survey to assess the burden of sepsis in Brazil, was sent to the medical director of each unit. Results: A representative sample of 277 of the 317 invited units responded to the resources survey. Most of the hospitals had fewer than 500 beds (94.6%) with a median of 14 beds in the intensive care unit. Providing care for public-insured patients was the main source of income in two-thirds of the surveyed units. Own microbiology laboratory was not available for 26.8% of the surveyed intensive care units, and 10.5% did not always have access to blood cultures. Broad spectrum antibiotics were not always available in 10.5% of surveyed units, and 21.3% could not always measure lactate within three hours. Those institutions with a high resource availability (158 units, 57%) were usually larger and preferentially served patients from the private health system compared to institutions without high resource availability. Otherwise, those without high resource availability did not always have broad-spectrum antibiotics (24.4%), vasopressors (4.2%) or crystalloids (7.6%). Conclusion: Our study indicates that a relevant number of units cannot perform basic monitoring and therapeutic interventions in septic patients. Our results highlight major opportunities for improvement to adhere to simple but effective interventions in Brazil.

The epidemiology of sepsis in Brazilian intensive care units (the Sepsis PREvalence Assessment Database, SPREAD): an observational study.

BACKGROUND: The sepsis burden on acute care services in middle-income countries is a cause for concern. We estimated incidence, prevalence, and mortality of sepsis in adult Brazilian intensive care units (ICUs) and association of ICU organisational factors with outcome. METHODS: We did a 1-day point prevalence study with follow-up of patients in ICU with sepsis in a nationally representative pseudo-random sample. We produced a sampling frame initially stratified by geographical region. Each stratum was then stratified by hospitals' main source of income (serving general public vs privately insured individuals) and ICU size (ten or fewer beds vs more than ten beds), finally generating 40 strata. In each stratum we selected a random sample of ICUs so as to enrol the total required beds in 1690 Brazilian adult ICUs. We followed up patients until hospital discharge censored at 60 days, estimated incidence from prevalence and length of stay, and generated national estimates. We assessed mortality prognostic factors using random-effects logistic regression models. FINDINGS: On Feb 27, 2014, 227 (72%) of 317 ICUs that were randomly selected provided data on 2632 patients, of whom 794 had sepsis (30·2 septic patients per 100 ICU beds, 95% CI 28·4-31·9). The ICU sepsis incidence was 36·3 per 1000 patient-days (95% CI 29·8-44·0) and mortality was observed in 439 (55·7%) of 788 patients (95% CI 52·2-59·2). Low availability of resources (odds ratio [OR] 1·67, 95% CI 1·02-2·75, p=0·045) and adequacy of treatment (OR 0·56, 0·37-0·84, p=0·006) were independently associated with mortality. The projected incidence rate is 290 per 100 000 population (95% CI 237·9-351·2) of adult cases of ICU-treated sepsis per year, which yields about 420 000 cases annually, of whom 230 000 die in hospital. INTERPRETATION: The incidence, prevalence, and mortality of ICU-treated sepsis is high in Brazil. Outcome varies considerably, and is associated with access to adequate resources and treatment. Our results show the burden of sepsis in resource-limited settings, highlighting the need to establish programmes aiming for sepsis prevention, early diagnosis, and adequate treatment. FUNDING: Fundação de Apoio a Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP).

Quality Improvement Initiatives in Sepsis in an Emerging Country: Does the Institution's Main Source of Income Influence the Results? An Analysis of 21,103 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the results of a quality improvement initiative in sepsis in an emerging setting and to analyze it according to the institutions' main source of income (public or private). DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of the Latin American Sepsis Institute database from 2005 to 2014. SETTINGS: Brazilian public and private institutions. PATIENTS: Patients with sepsis admitted in the participant institutions. INTERVENTIONS: The quality improvement initiative was based on a multifaceted intervention. The institutions were instructed to collect data on 6-hour bundle compliance and outcomes in patients with sepsis in all hospital settings. Outcomes and compliance was measured for eight periods of 6 months each, starting at the time of the enrollment in the intervention. The primary outcomes were hospital mortality and compliance with 6-hour bundle. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We included 21,103 patients; 9,032 from public institutions and 12,071 from private institutions. Comparing the first period with the eigth period, compliance with the 6-hour bundle increased from 13.5% to 58.2% in the private institutions (p < 0.0001) and from 7.4% to 15.7% in the public institutions (p < 0.0001). Mortality rates significantly decreased throughout the program in private institutions, from 47.6% to 27.2% in the eighth period (adjusted odds ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.32-0.64). However, in the public hospitals, mortality diminished significantly only in the first two periods. CONCLUSION: This quality improvement initiative in sepsis in an emerging country was associated with a reduction in mortality and with improved compliance with quality indicators. However, this reduction was sustained only in private institutions.