Suspicion and treatment of severe sepsis. An overview of the prehospital chain of care

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

Sepsis is a life-threatening condition where the risk of death has been reported to be even higher than that associated with the major complications of atherosclerosis, i.e. myocardial infarction and stroke. In all three conditions, early treatment could limit organ dysfunction and thereby improve the prognosis.

Aim

To describe what has been published in the literature a/ with regard to the association between delay until start of treatment and outcome in sepsis with the emphasis on the pre-hospital phase and b/ to present published data and the opportunity to improve various links in the pre-hospital chain of care in sepsis.

Methods

A literature search was performed on the PubMed, Embase (Ovid SP) and Cochrane Library databases.

Results

In overall terms, we found a small number of articles (n = 12 of 1,162 unique hits) which addressed the prehospital phase. For each hour of delay until the start of antibiotics, the prognosis appeared to become worse. However, there was no evidence that prehospital treatment improved the prognosis.

Studies indicated that about half of the patients with severe sepsis used the emergency medical service (EMS) for transport to hospital. Patients who used the EMS experienced a shorter delay to treatment with antibiotics and the start of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT). Among EMS-transported patients, those in whom the EMS staff already suspected sepsis at the scene had a shorter delay to treatment with antibiotics and the start of EGDT.

There are insufficient data on other links in the prehospital chain of care, i.e. patients, bystanders and dispatchers.

Conclusion

Severe sepsis is a life-threatening condition. Previous studies suggest that, with every hour of delay until the start of antibiotics, the prognosis deteriorates. About half of the patients use the EMS. We need to know more about the present situation with regard to the different links in the prehospital chain of care in sepsis.

Related collections

Most cited references 31

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Multiple organ dysfunction score: a reliable descriptor of a complex clinical outcome.

J C Marshall, D J Cook, N V Christou … (1995)

To develop an objective scale to measure the severity of the multiple organ dysfunction syndrome as an outcome in critical illness. Systematic literature review; prospective cohort study. Surgical intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary-level teaching hospital. All patients (n = 692) admitted for > 24 hrs between May 1988 and March 1990. None. Computerized database review of MEDLINE identified clinical studies of multiple organ failure that were published between 1969 and 1993. Variables from these studies were evaluated for construct and content validity to identify optimal descriptors of organ dysfunction. Clinical and laboratory data were collected daily to evaluate the performance of these variables individually and in aggregate as an organ dysfunction score. Seven systems defined the multiple organ dysfunction syndrome in more than half of the 30 published reports reviewed. Descriptors meeting criteria for construct and content validity could be identified for five of these seven systems: a) the respiratory system (Po2/FIO2 ratio); b) the renal system (serum creatinine concentration); c) the hepatic system (serum bilirubin concentration); d) the hematologic system (platelet count); and e) the central nervous system (Glasgow Coma Scale). In the absence of an adequate descriptor of cardiovascular dysfunction, we developed a new variable, the pressure-adjusted heart rate, which is calculated as the product of the heart rate and the ratio of central venous pressure to mean arterial pressure. These candidate descriptors of organ dysfunction were then evaluated for criterion validity (ICU mortality rate) using the clinical database. From the first half of the database (the development set), intervals for the most abnormal value of each variable were constructed on a scale from 0 to 4 so that a value of 0 represented essentially normal function and was associated with an ICU mortality rate of or = 50%. These intervals were then tested on the second half of the data set (the validation set). Maximal scores for each variable were summed to yield a Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score (maximum of 24). This score correlated in a graded fashion with the ICU mortality rate, both when applied on the first day of ICU admission as a prognostic indicator and when calculated over the ICU stay as an outcome measure. For the latter, ICU mortality was approximately 25% at 9 to 12 points, 50% at 13 to 16 points, 75% at 17 to 20 points, and 100% at levels of > 20 points. The score showed excellent discrimination, as reflected in areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.936 in the development set and 0.928 in the validation set. The incremental increase in scores over the course of the ICU stay (calculated as the difference between maximal scores and those scores obtained on the first day [i.e., the delta Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score]) also demonstrated a strong correlation with the ICU mortality rate. In a logistic regression model, this incremental increase in scores accounted for more of the explanatory power than admission severity indices. This multiple organ dysfunction score, constructed using simple physiologic measures of dysfunction in six organ systems, mirrors organ dysfunction as the intensivist sees it and correlates strongly with the ultimate risk of ICU mortality and hospital mortality. The variable, delta Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score, reflects organ dysfunction developing during the ICU stay, which therefore is potentially amenable to therapeutic manipulation. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

0 comments Cited 386 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Implementation of a bundle of quality indicators for the early management of severe sepsis and septic shock is associated with decreased mortality.

H Nguyen, Stephen W Corbett, Robert Steele … (2007)

The purpose of this study was to examine the outcome implications of implementing a severe sepsis bundle in an emergency department as a quality indicator set with feedback to modify physician behavior related to the early management of severe sepsis and septic shock. Two-year prospective observational cohort. Academic tertiary care facility. Patients were 330 patients presenting to the emergency department who met criteria for severe sepsis or septic shock. Five quality indicators comprised the bundle for severe sepsis management in the emergency department: a) initiate central venous pressure (CVP)/central venous oxygen saturation (Scvo2) monitoring within 2 hrs; b) give broad-spectrum antibiotics within 4 hrs; c) complete early goal-directed therapy at 6 hrs; d) give corticosteroid if the patient is on vasopressor or if adrenal insufficiency is suspected; and e) monitor for lactate clearance. Patients had a mean age of 63.8 +/- 18.5 yrs, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score 29.6 +/- 10.6, emergency department length of stay 8.5 +/- 4.4 hrs, hospital length of stay 11.3 +/- 12.9 days, and in-hospital mortality 35.2%. Bundle compliance increased from zero to 51.2% at the end of the study period. During the emergency department stay, patients with the bundle completed received more CVP/Scvo2 monitoring (100.0 vs. 64.8%, p < .01), more antibiotics (100.0 vs. 89.7%, p = .04), and more corticosteroid (29.9 vs. 16.2%, p = .01) compared with patients with the bundle not completed. In a multivariate regression analysis including the five quality indicators, completion of early goal-directed therapy was significantly associated with decreased mortality (odds ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.79; p = .01). In-hospital mortality was less in patients with the bundle completed compared with patients with the bundle not completed (20.8 vs. 39.5%, p < .01). Implementation of a severe sepsis bundle using a quality improvement feedback to modify physician behavior in the emergency department setting was feasible and was associated with decreased in-hospital mortality.

0 comments Cited 138 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Treating patients with severe sepsis.

William Bernard, Julia Wheeler (1999)

0 comments Cited 118 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med

Title: Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine

Publisher: BioMed Central

ISSN (Electronic): 1757-7241

Publication date Collection: 2012

Publication date (Electronic): 27 June 2012

Volume: 20

Page: 42

Affiliations

[1 ]School of Health Sciences, Research Centre PreHospen, University of Borås, The Prehospital Research Centre of Western Sweden, SE 501 90, Borås, Sweden

[2 ]Department of Infectious Diseases, Skövde Central Hospital, Skövde, Sweden

[3 ]Sahlgrenska University Hospital, SE 413 45, Göteborg, Sweden

Article

Publisher ID: 1757-7241-20-42

DOI: 10.1186/1757-7241-20-42

PMC ID: 3441306

PubMed ID: 22738027

SO-VID: d6b6fbe4-9e63-4e3a-8da1-586cf03f9480

License:

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Suspicion and treatment of severe sepsis. An overview of the prehospital chain of care

Read this article at

Abstract

Background

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Related collections

Preventive and Emergency Medicine Insights

Most cited references 31

Multiple organ dysfunction score: a reliable descriptor of a complex clinical outcome.

Implementation of a bundle of quality indicators for the early management of severe sepsis and septic shock is associated with decreased mortality.

Treating patients with severe sepsis.

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 277

Cited by 10

Most referenced authors 865