Sepsis is a leading cause of mortality and early identification improves survival. With increasing digitalization of health care data automated sepsis prediction models hold promise to aid in prompt recognition. Most previous studies have focused on the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. Yet only a small proportion of sepsis develops in the ICU and there is an apparent clinical benefit to identify patients earlier in the disease trajectory. In this cohort of 82,852 hospital admissions and 8038 sepsis episodes classified according to the Sepsis-3 criteria, we demonstrate that a machine learned score can predict sepsis onset within 48 h using sparse routine electronic health record data outside the ICU. Our score was based on a causal probabilistic network model-SepsisFinder-which has similarities with clinical reasoning. A prediction was generated hourly on all admissions, providing a new variable was registered. Compared to the National Early Warning Score (NEWS2), which is an established method to identify sepsis, the SepsisFinder triggered earlier and had a higher area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) (0.950 vs. 0.872), as well as area under precision-recall curve (APR) (0.189 vs. 0.149). A machine learning comparator based on a gradient-boosting decision tree model had similar AUROC (0.949) and higher APR (0.239) than SepsisFinder but triggered later than both NEWS2 and SepsisFinder. The precision of SepsisFinder increased if screening was restricted to the earlier admission period and in episodes with bloodstream infection. Furthermore, the SepsisFinder signaled median 5.5 h prior to antibiotic administration. Identifying a high-risk population with this method could be used to tailor clinical interventions and improve patient care. Weniger anzeigen

Background: The World Health Organization has adopted a resolution on sepsis and urged member states to develop national processes to improve sepsis care. In Sweden, sepsis was selected as one of the ten first diagnoses to be addressed, when the Swedish government in 2019 allocated funds for patient-centred clinical pathways in healthcare. A national multidisciplinary working group, including a patient representative, was appointed to develop the patient-centred clinical pathway for sepsis. Methods: The working group mapped challenges and needs surrounding sepsis care and included a survey sent to all emergency departments (ED) in Sweden, and then designed a patient-centred clinical pathway for sepsis. Results: The working group decided to focus on the following four areas: (1) sepsis alert for early detection and management optimisation for the most severely ill sepsis patients in the ED; (2) accurate sepsis diagnosis coding; (3) structured information to patients at discharge after sepsis care and (4) structured telephone follow-up after sepsis care. A health-economic analysis indicated that the implementation of the clinical pathway for sepsis will most likely not drive costs. An important aspect of the clinical pathway is implementing continuous monitoring of performance and process indicators. A national working group is currently building up such a system for monitoring, focusing on extraction of this information from the electronic health records systems. Conclusion: A national patient-centred clinical pathway for sepsis has been developed and is currently being implemented in Swedish healthcare. We believe that the clinical pathway and the accompanying monitoring will provide a more efficient and equal sepsis care and improved possibilities to monitor and further develop sepsis care in Sweden. Weniger anzeigen

Background LAoUng: -PteleramsehceonaflitrhmstehqatuaellaheaodfinthgelevCeolsraornearevpirrueseDnitseedcaosrere2c0tl1y9: (COVID-19) are a major public health concern. However, evidence on post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (post-COVID-19) is still limited, particularly for children and adolescents. Utilizing comprehensive healthcare data on approximately 46% of the German population, we investigated post-COVID-19- associated morbidity in children/adolescents and adults. Methods and findings We used routine data from German statutory health insurance organizations covering the period between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2020. The base population included all individuals insured for at least 1 day in 2020. Based on documented diagnoses, we identified individuals with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed COVID-19 through June 30, 2020. A control cohort was assigned using 1:5 exact matching on age and sex, and propen- sity score matching on preexisting medical conditions. The date of COVID-19 diagnosis was used as index date for both cohorts, which were followed for incident morbidity outcomes documented in the second quarter after index date or later.Overall, 96 prespecified out- comes were aggregated into 13 diagnosis/symptom complexes and 3 domains (physicalhealth, mental health, and physical/mental overlap domain). We used Poisson regression to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). The study population included 11,950 children/adolescents (48.1% female, 67.2% aged between 0 and 11 years) and 145,184 adults (60.2% female, 51.1% aged between 18 and 49 years). The mean follow-up time was 236 days (standard deviation (SD) = 44 days, range = 121 to 339 days) in children/adolescents and 254 days (SD = 36 days, range = 93 to 340 days) in adults. COVID-19 and control cohort were well balanced regarding covariates. The specific outcomes with the highest IRR and an incidence rate (IR) of at least 1/100 person-years in the COVID-19 cohort in children and adolescents were malaise/fatigue/exhaustion (IRR: 2.28, 95% CI: 1.71 to 3.06, p < 0.01, IR COVID-19: 12.58, IR Control: 5.51), cough (IRR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.48 to 2.04, p < 0.01, IR COVID-19: 36.56, IR Control: 21.06), and throat/ chest pain (IRR: 1.72, 95% CI: 1.39 to 2.12, p < 0.01, IR COVID-19: 20.01, IR Control: 11.66). In adults, these included disturbances of smell and taste (IRR: 6.69, 95% CI: 5.88 to 7.60, p < 0.01, IR COVID-19: 12.42, IR Control: 1.86), fever (IRR: 3.33, 95% CI: 3.01 to 3.68, p < 0.01, IR COVID-19: 11.53, IR Control: 3.46), and dyspnea (IRR: 2.88, 95% CI: 2.74 to 3.02, p < 0.01, IR COVID-19: 43.91, IR Control: 15.27). For all health outcomes com- bined, IRs per 1,000 person-years in the COVID-19 cohort were significantly higher than those in the control cohort in both children/adolescents (IRR: 1.30, 95% CI: 1.25 to 1.35, p < 0.01, IR COVID-19: 436.91, IR Control: 335.98) and adults (IRR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.31 to 1.34, p < 0.01, IR COVID-19: 615.82, IR Control: 464.15). The relative magnitude of increased documented morbidity was similar for the physical, mental, and physical/mental overlap domain. In the COVID-19 cohort, IRs were significantly higher in all 13 diagnosis/symptom complexes in adults and in 10 diagnosis/symptom complexes in children/adolescents. IRR estimates were similar for age groups 0 to 11 and 12 to 17. IRs in children/adolescents were consistently lower than those in adults. Limitations of our study include potentially unmea- sured confounding and detection bias. Conclusions In this retrospective matched cohort study, we observed significant new onset morbidity in children, adolescents, and adults across 13 prespecified diagnosis/symptom complexes, following COVID-19 infection. These findings expand the existing available evidence on post-COVID-19 conditions in younger age groups and confirm previous findings in adults. Weniger anzeigen

IMPORTANCE Children commonly experience physical, cognitive, or emotional sequelae after sepsis. However, little is known about the development or progression of medical conditions after pediatric sepsis. OBJECTIVE To quantify the development and progression of 4 common conditions in the 6 months after sepsis and to assess whether they differed after hospitalization for sepsis vs nonsepsis among critically ill children. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study of 101 511 children (<19 years) with sepsis or nonsepsis hospitalization used a national administrative claims database (January 1, 2010, to June 30, 2018). Data management and analysis were conducted from April 1, 2020, to July 7, 2022. EXPOSURES Intensive care unit hospitalization for sepsis vs all-cause intensive care unit hospitalizations, excluding sepsis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary outcomes were the development of 4 target conditions (chronic respiratory failure, seizure disorder, supplemental nutritional dependence, and chronic kidney disease) within 6 months of hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes were the progression of the 4 target conditions among children with the condition before hospitalization. Outcomes were identified via diagnostic and procedural codes, durable medical equipment codes, and prescription medications. Differences in the development and the progression of conditions between pediatric patients with sepsis and pediatric patients with nonsepsis who survived intensive care unit hospitalization were assessed using logistic regression with matching weights. RESULTS A total of 5150 survivors of pediatric sepsis and 96 361 survivors of nonsepsis intensive care unit hospitalizations were identified; 2593 (50.3%) were female. The median age was 9.5 years (IQR, 3-15 years) in the sepsis cohort and 7 years (IQR, 2-13 years) in the nonsepsis cohort. Of the 5150 sepsis survivors, 670 (13.0%) developed a new target condition, and 385 of 1834 (21.0%) with a preexisting target condition had disease progression. A total of 998 of the 5150 survivors (19.4%) had development and/or progression of at least 1 condition. New conditions were more common among sepsis vs nonsepsis hospitalizations (new chronic respiratory failure: 4.6% vs 1.9%; odds ratio [OR], 2.54 [95% CI, 2.19-2.94]; new supplemental nutritional dependence: 7.9% vs 2.7%; OR, 3.17 [95% CI, 2.80-3.59]; and new chronic kidney disease: 1.1% vs 0.6%; OR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.25-2.19]). New seizure disorder was less common (4.6% vs 6.0%; OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.66-0.89]). Progressive supplemental nutritional dependence was more common (1.5% vs 0.5%; OR, 2.95 [95% CI, 1.60-5.42]), progressive epilepsy was less common (33.7% vs 40.6%; OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.65-0.86]), and progressive respiratory failure (4.4% vs 3.3%; OR, 1.35 [95% CI, 0.89-2.04]) and progressive chronic kidney disease (7.9% vs 9.2%; OR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.18-3.91]) were similar among survivors of sepsis vs nonsepsis admitted to an intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this national cohort of critically ill children who survived sepsis, 1 in 5 developed or had progression of a condition of interest after sepsis hospitalization, suggesting survivors of pediatric sepsis may benefit from structured       follow-up to identify and treat new or worsening medical comorbid conditions. Weniger anzeigen

Rationale – Directly comparative data on sepsis epidemiology and sepsis bundle implementation in countries of differing national wealth remain sparse. Objectives – To evaluate across countries/regions of differing income status in Asia (a) the prevalence, causes, and outcomes of sepsis as a reason for ICU admission and (b) sepsis bundle (antibiotics administration, blood culture and lactate measurement) compliance and its association with hospital mortality. Methods – Prospective point-prevalence study among 386 adult intensive care units (ICU) from 22 Asian countries/regions. Adult ICU participants admitted for sepsis on four separate days (representing the seasons of 2019) were recruited. Measurements and Main Results – Overall prevalence of sepsis in ICU was 22.4% [20.9% vs 24.5% vs 21.3% in low-income/lower-middle-income (LICs/LMICs), upper-middle-income (UMICs), and high-income countries/regions (HICs) respectively, p<0.001]. Patients were younger and had lower severity of illness in LICs/LMICs. Hospital mortality was 32.6%, and marginally significantly higher in LICs/LMICs than HICs on multivariable generalized mixed model analysis [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.84 (95% CI 1.00-3.37), p=0.049]. Sepsis bundle compliance was 21.5% at 1 hour (26.0% vs 22.1% vs 16.2% in LICs/LMICs, UMICs, and HICs respectively, p<0.001), and 36.6% at 3 hours (39.3% vs 32.8% vs 38.5% respectively, p=0.001). Delaying antibiotics administration beyond 3 hours was the only element independently associated with increased mortality [AOR 2.53 (95% CI 2.07-3.08), p<0.001]. Conclusions – Sepsis is a common cause of admission to Asian ICUs. Mortality remains high, and is higher in LICs/LMICs after controlling for confounders. Sepsis bundle compliance remains low. Delaying antibiotics administration beyond three hours from diagnosis is associated with increased mortality. Weniger anzeigen

There is a growing number of COVID-19 patients experiencing long-term symptoms months after their acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. Previous research proved dogs‘ ability to detect acute SARS-CoV-2 infections, but has not yet shown if dogs also indicate samples of patients with post-COVID-19 condition (Long COVID). Nine dogs, previously trained to detect samples of acute COVID-19 patients, were confronted with samples of Long COVID patients in two testing scenarios. In test scenario I (samples of acute COVID-19 vs. Long COVID) dogs achieved a mean sensitivity (for acute COVID-19) of 86.7% (95%CI: 75.4-98.0%) and a specificity of 95.8% (95%CI: 92.5-99.0%). When dogs were confronted with Long COVID and negative control samples in scenario IIa, dogs achieved a mean sensitivity (for Long COVID) of 94.4 (95%CI: 70.5-100.0%) and a specificity of 96.1% (95%CI: 87.6-100.0%). In comparison, when acute SARS-CoV-2 positive samples and negative control samples were comparatively presented (scenario IIb), a mean sensitivity of 86.9 (95%CI: 55.7-100.0%) and a specificity of 88.1% (95%CI: 82.7-93.6%) was attained. This pilot study supports the hypothesis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) being long-term present after the initial infection in post-COVID-19 patients. Detection dogs, trained with samples of acute COVID-19 patients, also identified samples of Long COVID patients with a high sensitivity when presented next to samples of healthy individuals. This data may be used for further studies evaluating the pathophysiology underlying Long COVID and the composition of specific VOC-patterns released by SARS-CoV-2 infected patients throughout the course of this complex disease. Weniger anzeigen

Background: Data on long-term outcomes after sepsis-associated critical illness have mostly come from small cohort studies, with no information about the incidence of new disability. We investigated whether sepsis-associated critical illness was independently associated with new disability at 6 months after ICU admission compared with other types of critical illness. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multicenter, prospective cohort study in six metropolitan intensive care units in Australia. Adult patients were eligible if they had been admitted to the ICU and received more than 24 h of mechanical ventilation. There was no intervention. Results: The primary outcome was new disability measured with the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS) 12 level score compared between baseline and 6 months. Between enrollment and follow-up at 6 months, 222/888 (25%) patients died, 100 (35.5%) with sepsis and 122 (20.1%) without sepsis (P < 0.001). Among survivors, there was no difference for the incidence of new disability at 6 months with or without sepsis, 42/106 (39.6%) and 106/300 (35.3%) (RD, 0.00 (- 10.29 to 10.40), P = 0.995), respectively. In addition, there was no difference in the severity of disability, health-related quality of life, anxiety and depression, post-traumatic stress, return to work, financial distress or cognitive function. Conclusions: Compared to mechanically ventilated patients of similar acuity and length of stay without sepsis, patients with sepsis admitted to ICU have an increased risk of death, but survivors have a similar risk of new disability at 6 months. Trial registration NCT03226912, registered July 24, 2017. Keywords: Critical illness, Disability, Intensive care, Mechanical ventilation, Recovery, Sepsis Weniger anzeigen

Background: Sepsis, a life-threatening organ dysfunction induced by infection, is a major public health problem. This study aimed to evaluate the frequency and mortality of sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock in China. Methods: We Searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library from 1 January 1992 to 1 June 2020 for studies that reported on the frequency and mortality of sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock conducted in China. Random effects models were performed to estimate the pooled frequency and mortality of sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock. Results: Our search yielded 846 results, of which 29 studies were included in this review. The pooled frequency of sepsis was estimated at 33.6% (95% CI 25.9% to 41.3%, I2 = 99.2%; p < 0.001), and the pooled mortality of sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock were 29.0% (95% CI 25.3%-32.8%, I2 = 92.1%; p = 0), 31.1% (95% CI 25.3% to 36.9%, I2 = 85.8%; p < 0.001) and 37.3% (95% CI 28.6%-46.0%, I2 = 93.5%; p < 0.001). There was significant heterogeneity between studies. With a small number of included studies and the changing definition of sepsis, trends in sepsis frequency and mortality were not sufficient for analysis. Epidemiological data on sepsis in the emergency department (ED) are severely lacking, and more research is urgently needed in this area is urgently needed. Conclusions: Our findings indicated that the frequency and mortality of sepsis and septic shock in China were much higher than North America and Europe countries. Based on our results, an extremely high incidence and mortality of sepsis and septic shock in China's mainland requires more healthcare budget support. Epidemiological data on sepsis and septic shock in ED are severely lacking, and more research is urgently needed in this area. Trial registration This systematic review was conducted according to the statement of the preferred reporting items for systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42021243325) and the meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P). Keywords: China, Frequency, Meta-analysis, Mortality, Sepsis Weniger anzeigen

Importance: Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) is a common and potentially severe infectious disease (ID). Retrospective studies and derived meta-analyses suggest that bedside infectious disease consultation (IDC) for SAB is associated with improved survival; however, such IDCs might not always be possible because of the lack of ID specialists, particularly at nonacademic hospitals. Objectives: To investigate whether unsolicited telephone IDCs (triggered by an automated blood stream infection reporting system) to nonacademic hospitals improved 30-day all-cause mortality in patients with SAB. Design, setting, and participants: This patient-blinded, multicenter, interventional, cluster randomized, controlled, crossover clinical trial was conducted in 21 rural, nonacademic hospitals in Thuringia, Germany. From July 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018, 1029 blood culture reports were assessed for eligibility. A total of 386 patients were enrolled, whereas 643 patients were not enrolled for the following reasons: death before enrollment (n = 59); palliative care (n = 41); recurrence of SAB (n = 9); discharge from the hospital before enrollment (n = 77); age younger than 18 years (n = 5); duplicate report from a single patient (n = 26); late report (n = 17); blood culture reported during the washout phase (n = 48); and no signed informed consent for other or unknown reasons (n = 361). Interventions: During the ID intervention phase, ID specialists from Jena University Hospital provided unsolicited telephone IDCs to physicians treating patients with SAB. During the control phase, patients were treated according to local standards. Crossover was performed after including 15 patients or, at the latest, 1 year after the first patient was included. Main outcomes and measures: Thirty-day all-cause mortality. Results: A total of 386 patients (median [IQR] age, 75 [63-82] years; 261 [67.6%] male) were included, with 177 randomized to the IDC group and 209 to the control group. The 30-day all-cause mortality rate did not differ between the IDC and control groups (relative risk reduction [RRR], 0.12; 95% CI, -2.17 to 0.76; P = .81). No evidence was found of a difference in secondary outcomes, including 90-day mortality (RRR, 0.17; 95% CI, -0.59 to 0.57; P = .62), 90-day recurrence (RRR, 0.10; 95% CI, -2.51 to 0.89; P = .89), and hospital readmission (RRR, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.63 to 0.48; P = .90). Exploratory evidence suggested that indicators of quality of care were potentially realized more often in the IDC group than in the control group (relative quality improvement, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.08-0.26; P = .01). Conclusions and relevance: In this cluster randomized clinical trial, unsolicited telephone IDC, although potentially enhancing quality of care, did not improve 30-day all-cause mortality in patients with SAB. Trial registration: drks.de Identifier: DRKS00010135. Weniger anzeigen