Importance: Sepsis survivorship is associated with postsepsis morbidity, but epidemiological data from population-based cohorts are lacking. Objective: To quantify the frequency and co-occurrence of new diagnoses consistent with postsepsis morbidity and mortality as well as new nursing care dependency and total health care costs after sepsis. Design, setting, and participants: This retrospective cohort study based on nationwide health claims data included a population-based cohort of 23.0 million beneficiaries of a large German health insurance provider. Patients aged 15 years and older with incident hospital-treated sepsis in 2013 to 2014 were included. Data were analyzed from January 2009 to December 2017. Exposures: Sepsis, identified by International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) hospital discharge codes. Main outcomes and measures: New medical, psychological, and cognitive diagnoses; long-term mortality; dependency on nursing care; and overall health care costs in survivors at 1 to 12, 13 to 24, and 25 to 36 months after hospital discharge. Results: Among 23.0 million eligible individuals, we identified 159 684 patients hospitalized with sepsis in 2013 to 2014. The mean (SD) age was 73.8 (12.8) years, and 75 809 (47.5%; 95% CI, 47.2%-47.7%) were female patients. In-hospital mortality was 27.0% (43 177 patients; 95% CI, 26.8%-27.3%). Among 116 507 hospital survivors, 86 578 (74.3%; 95% CI, 74.1%-74.6%) had a new diagnosis in the first year post sepsis; 28 405 (24.4%; 95% CI, 24.1%-24.6%) had diagnoses co-occurring in medical, psychological, or cognitive domains; and 23 572 of 74 878 survivors (31.5%; 95% CI, 31.1%-31.8%) without prior nursing care dependency were newly dependent on nursing care. In total, 35 765 survivors (30.7%; 95% CI, 30.4%-31.0%) died within the first year. In the second and third year, 53 089 (65.8%; 95% CI, 65.4%-66.1%) and 40 959 (59.4%; 95% CI, 59.0%-59.8%) had new diagnoses, respectively. Health care costs for sepsis hospital survivors for 3 years post sepsis totaled a mean of €29 088/patient ($32 868/patient) (SD, €44 195 [$49 938]). New postsepsis morbidity (>1 new diagnosis) was more common in survivors of severe sepsis (75.6% [95% CI, 75.1%-76.0%]) than nonsevere sepsis (73.7% [95% CI, 73.4%-74.0%]; P < .001) and more common in survivors treated in the intensive care unit (78.3% [95% CI, 77.8%-78.7%]) than in those not treated in the intensive care unit (72.8% [95% CI, 72.5%-73.1%]; P < .001). Postsepsis morbidity was 68.5% (95% CI, 67.5%-69.5%) among survivors without prior morbidity and 56.1% (95% CI, 54.2%-57.9%) in survivors younger than 40 years. Conclusions and relevance: In this study, new medical, psychological, and cognitive diagnoses consistent with postsepsis morbidity were common after sepsis, including among patients with less severe sepsis, no prior diagnoses, and younger age. This calls for more efforts to elucidate the underlying mechanisms, define optimal screening for common new diagnoses, and test interventions to prevent and treat postsepsis morbidity. Weniger anzeigen

Background: US hospitals have reported compliance with the SEP-1 quality measure to Medicare since 2015. Finding an association between compliance and outcomes is essential to gauge measure effectiveness. Research question: What is the association between compliance with SEP-1 and 30-day mortality among Medicare beneficiaries? Study design and methods: Studying patient-level data reported to Medicare by 3,241 hospitals from October 1, 2015, to March 31, 2017, we used propensity score matching and a hierarchical general linear model (HGLM) to estimate the treatment effects associated with compliance with SEP-1. Compliance was defined as completion of all qualifying SEP-1 elements including lactate measurements, blood culture collection, broad-spectrum antibiotic administration, 30 mL/kg crystalloid fluid administration, application of vasopressors, and patient reassessment. The primary outcome was a change in 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included changes in length of stay. Results: We completed two matches to evaluate population-level treatment effects. In standard match, 122,870 patients whose care was compliant were matched with the same number whose care was noncompliant. Compliance was associated with a reduction in 30-day mortality (21.81% vs 27.48%, respectively), yielding an absolute risk reduction (ARR) of 5.67% (95% CI, 5.33-6.00; P < .001). In stringent match, 107,016 patients whose care was compliant were matched with the same number whose care was noncompliant. Compliance was associated with a reduction in 30-day mortality (22.22% vs 26.28%, respectively), yielding an ARR of 4.06% (95% CI, 3.70-4.41; P < .001). At the subject level, our HGLM found compliance associated with lower 30-day risk-adjusted mortality (adjusted conditional OR, 0.829; 95% CI, 0.812-0.846; P < .001). Multiple elements correlated with lower mortality. Median length of stay was shorter among cases whose care was compliant (5 vs 6 days; interquartile range, 3-9 vs 4-10, respectively; P < .001). Interpretation: Compliance with SEP-1 was associated with lower 30-day mortality. Rendering SEP-1 compliant care may reduce the incidence of avoidable deaths. Keywords: Medicare, compliance, length of stay, mortality, propensity score matching, sepsis, sepsis bundles, septic shock, severe sepsis Weniger anzeigen

Sepsis is life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. Sepsis and septic shock are major healthcare problems, impacting millions of people around the world each year and killing between one in three and one in six of those it affects. Early identification and appropriate management in the initial hours after the development of sepsis improve outcomes. The recommendations in this document are intended to provide guidance for the clinician caring for adult patients with sepsis or septic shock in the hospital setting. Recommendations from these guidelines cannot replace the clinician’s decision-making capability when presented with a unique patient’s clinical variables. These guidelines are intended to reflect best practice. Weniger anzeigen

Background: Sepsis is life-threatening organ dysfunction due to a dysregulated host response to infection. It is considered a major cause of health loss, but data for the global burden of sepsis are limited. As a syndrome caused by underlying infection, sepsis is not part of standard Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) estimates. Accurate estimates are important to inform and monitor health policy interventions, allocation of resources, and clinical treatment initiatives. We estimated the global, regional, and national incidence of sepsis and mortality from this disorder using data from GBD 2017. Methods: We used multiple cause-of-death data from 109 million individual death records to calculate mortality related to sepsis among each of the 282 underlying causes of death in GBD 2017. The percentage of sepsis-related deaths by underlying GBD cause in each location worldwide was modelled using mixed-effects linear regression. Sepsis-related mortality for each age group, sex, location, GBD cause, and year (1990-2017) was estimated by applying modelled cause-specific fractions to GBD 2017 cause-of-death estimates. We used data for 8·7 million individual hospital records to calculate in-hospital sepsis-associated case-fatality, stratified by underlying GBD cause. In-hospital sepsis-associated case-fatality was modelled for each location using linear regression, and sepsis incidence was estimated by applying modelled case-fatality to sepsis-related mortality estimates. Findings: In 2017, an estimated 48·9 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 38·9-62·9) incident cases of sepsis were recorded worldwide and 11·0 million (10·1-12·0) sepsis-related deaths were reported, representing 19·7% (18·2-21·4) of all global deaths. Age-standardised sepsis incidence fell by 37·0% (95% UI 11·8-54·5) and mortality decreased by 52·8% (47·7-57·5) from 1990 to 2017. Sepsis incidence and mortality varied substantially across regions, with the highest burden in sub-Saharan Africa, Oceania, south Asia, east Asia, and southeast Asia. Interpretation: Despite declining age-standardised incidence and mortality, sepsis remains a major cause of health loss worldwide and has an especially high health-related burden in sub-Saharan Africa. Funding: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the University of Pittsburgh, the British Columbia Children’s Hospital Foundation, the Wellcome Trust, and the Fleming Fund. Weniger anzeigen

Bei einer Sepsis handelt es sich um eine lebensbedrohliche Organdysfunktion ausgelöst durch eine Infektion, die mit einer Regulationsstörung beim Wirt einhergeht. Ähnlich wie bei Polytrauma, akutem Herzinfarkt oder Schlaganfall können das frühzeitige Erkennen einer Sepsis und deren Behandlung in den ersten Stunden nach ihrem Auftreten die schwerwiegenden Folgen einer Infektion verhindern oder abschwächen. Die Leitlinie fasst angemessene, wissenschaftlich begründete und aktuelle Verfahren für Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge zusammen und ergänzt diese um Maßnahmen der Sepsisprävention. Die Empfehlungen der Leitlinie sollen als unterstützende Informations- und Entscheidungsgrundlage für den Kliniker zur Behandlung von erwachsenen Patienten mit Sepsis oder septischem Schock dienen. Sie ersetzen nicht die Fähigkeiten des Arztes, eine angemessene Entscheidung bei der individuellen Behandlung eines Patienten nach Maßgabe der verfügbaren klinischen Parameter zu treffen. Die vorliegende interdisziplinäre Leitlinie der Klassifikation S3 ist ein evidenz- und konsensbasiertes Instrument zur Verbesserung und Qualitätssicherung von Prävention, Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge der Sepsis. Sie richtet sich an alle damit betrauten Berufsgruppen sowie an Betroffene, übergeordnete Organisationen (z. B. Krankenkassen und Einrichtungen der ärztlichen Selbstverwaltung) und die interessierte Fachöffentlichkeit. Weniger anzeigen

Importance: Beginning in 2013, New York State implemented regulations mandating that hospitals implement evidence-based protocols for sepsis management, as well as report data on protocol adherence and clinical outcomes to the state government. The association between these mandates and sepsis outcomes is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the association between New York State sepsis regulations and the outcomes of patients hospitalized with sepsis. Design, setting, and participants: Retrospective cohort study of adult patients hospitalized with sepsis in New York State and in 4 control states (Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New Jersey) using all-payer hospital discharge data (January 1, 2011-September 30, 2015) and a comparative interrupted time series analytic approach. Exposures: Hospitalization for sepsis before (January 1, 2011-March 31, 2013) vs after (April 1, 2013-September 30, 2015) implementation of the 2013 New York State sepsis regulations. Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was 30-day in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit admission rates, central venous catheter use, Clostridium difficile infection rates, and hospital length of stay. Results: The final analysis included 1 012 410 sepsis admissions to 509 hospitals. The mean age was 69.5 years (SD, 16.4 years) and 47.9% were female. In New York State and in the control states, 139 019 and 289 225 patients, respectively, were admitted before implementation of the sepsis regulations and 186 767 and 397 399 patients, respectively, were admitted after implementation of the sepsis regulations. Unadjusted 30-day in-hospital mortality was 26.3% in New York State and 22.0% in the control states before the regulations, and was 22.0% in New York State and 19.1% in the control states after the regulations. Adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics as well as preregulation temporal trends and season, mortality after implementation of the regulations decreased significantly in New York State relative to the control states (P = .02 for the joint test of the comparative interrupted time series estimates). For example, by the 10th quarter after implementation of the regulations, adjusted absolute mortality was 3.2% (95% CI, 1.0% to 5.4%) lower than expected in New York State relative to the control states (P = .004). The regulations were associated with no significant differences in intensive care unit admission rates (P = .09) (10th quarter adjusted difference, 2.8% [95% CI, -1.7% to 7.2%], P = .22), a significant relative decrease in hospital length of stay (P = .04) (10th quarter adjusted difference, 0.50 days [95% CI, -0.47 to 1.47 days], P = .31), a significant relative decrease in the C difficile infection rate (P < .001) (10th quarter adjusted difference, -1.8% [95% CI, -2.6% to -1.0%], P < .001), and a significant relative increase in central venous catheter use (P = .02) (10th quarter adjusted difference, 4.8% [95% CI, 2.3% to 7.4%], P < .001). Conclusions and relevance: In New York State, mandated protocolized sepsis care was associated with a greater decrease in sepsis mortality compared with sepsis mortality in control states that did not implement sepsis regulations. Because baseline mortality rates differed between New York and comparison states, it is uncertain whether these findings are generalizable to other states. Weniger anzeigen

Importance: Survival from sepsis has improved in recent years, resulting in an increasing number of patients who have survived sepsis treatment. Current sepsis guidelines do not provide guidance on posthospital care or recovery. Observations: Each year, more than 19 million individuals develop sepsis, defined as a life-threatening acute organ dysfunction secondary to infection. Approximately 14 million survive to hospital discharge and their prognosis varies. Half of patients recover, one-third die during the following year, and one-sixth have severe persistent impairments. Impairments include development of an average of 1 to 2 new functional limitations (eg, inability to bathe or dress independently), a 3-fold increase in prevalence of moderate to severe cognitive impairment (from 6.1% before hospitalization to 16.7% after hospitalization), and a high prevalence of mental health problems, including anxiety (32% of patients who survive), depression (29%), or posttraumatic stress disorder (44%). About 40% of patients are rehospitalized within 90 days of discharge, often for conditions that are potentially treatable in the outpatient setting, such as infection (11.9%) and exacerbation of heart failure (5.5%). Compared with patients hospitalized for other diagnoses, those who survive sepsis (11.9%) are at increased risk of recurrent infection than matched patients (8.0%) matched patients (P < .001), acute renal failure (3.3% vs 1.2%, P < .001), and new cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] range, 1.1-1.4). Reasons for deterioration of health after sepsis are multifactorial and include accelerated progression of preexisting chronic conditions, residual organ damage, and impaired immune function. Characteristics associated with complications after hospital discharge for sepsis treatment are not fully understood but include both poorer presepsis health status, characteristics of the acute septic episode (eg, severity of infection, host response to infection), and quality of hospital treatment (eg, timeliness of initial sepsis care, avoidance of treatment-related harms). Although there is a paucity of clinical trial evidence to support specific postdischarge rehabilitation treatment, experts recommend referral to physical therapy to improve exercise capacity, strength, and independent completion of activities of daily living. This recommendation is supported by an observational study involving 30 000 sepsis survivors that found that referral to rehabilitation within 90 days was associated with lower risk of 10-year mortality compared with propensity-matched controls (adjusted HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.97, P < .001). Conclusions and relevance: In the months after hospital discharge for sepsis, management should focus on (1) identifying new physical, mental, and cognitive problems and referring for appropriate treatment, (2) reviewing and adjusting long-term medications, and (3) evaluating for treatable conditions that commonly result in hospitalization, such as infection, heart failure, renal failure, and aspiration. For patients with poor or declining health prior to sepsis who experience further deterioration after sepsis, it may be appropriate to focus on palliation of symptoms. Weniger anzeigen

Background: In 2013, New York began requiring hospitals to follow protocols for the early identification and treatment of sepsis. However, there is controversy about whether more rapid treatment of sepsis improves outcomes in patients. Methods: We studied data from patients with sepsis and septic shock that were reported to the New York State Department of Health from April 1, 2014, to June 30, 2016. Patients had a sepsis protocol initiated within 6 hours after arrival in the emergency department and had all items in a 3-hour bundle of care for patients with sepsis (i.e., blood cultures, broad-spectrum antibiotic agents, and lactate measurement) completed within 12 hours. Multilevel models were used to assess the associations between the time until completion of the 3-hour bundle and risk-adjusted mortality. We also examined the times to the administration of antibiotics and to the completion of an initial bolus of intravenous fluid. Results: Among 49,331 patients at 149 hospitals, 40,696 (82.5%) had the 3-hour bundle completed within 3 hours. The median time to completion of the 3-hour bundle was 1.30 hours (interquartile range, 0.65 to 2.35), the median time to the administration of antibiotics was 0.95 hours (interquartile range, 0.35 to 1.95), and the median time to completion of the fluid bolus was 2.56 hours (interquartile range, 1.33 to 4.20). Among patients who had the 3-hour bundle completed within 12 hours, a longer time to the completion of the bundle was associated with higher risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 1.04 per hour; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 1.05; P<0.001), as was a longer time to the administration of antibiotics (odds ratio, 1.04 per hour; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.06; P<0.001) but not a longer time to the completion of a bolus of intravenous fluids (odds ratio, 1.01 per hour; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.02; P=0.21). Conclusions: More rapid completion of a 3-hour bundle of sepsis care and rapid administration of antibiotics, but not rapid completion of an initial bolus of intravenous fluids, were associated with lower risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others.). Weniger anzeigen

Importance: Estimates from claims-based analyses suggest that the incidence of sepsis is increasing and mortality rates from sepsis are decreasing. However, estimates from claims data may lack clinical fidelity and can be affected by changing diagnosis and coding practices over time. Objective: To estimate the US national incidence of sepsis and trends using detailed clinical data from the electronic health record (EHR) systems of diverse hospitals. Design, setting, and population: Retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to 409 academic, community, and federal hospitals from 2009-2014. Exposures: Sepsis was identified using clinical indicators of presumed infection and concurrent acute organ dysfunction, adapting Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3) criteria for objective and consistent EHR-based surveillance. Main outcomes and measures: Sepsis incidence, outcomes, and trends from 2009-2014 were calculated using regression models and compared with claims-based estimates using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes for severe sepsis or septic shock. Case-finding criteria were validated against Sepsis-3 criteria using medical record reviews. Results: A total of 173 690 sepsis cases (mean age, 66.5 [SD, 15.5] y; 77 660 [42.4%] women) were identified using clinical criteria among 2 901 019 adults admitted to study hospitals in 2014 (6.0% incidence). Of these, 26 061 (15.0%) died in the hospital and 10 731 (6.2%) were discharged to hospice. From 2009-2014, sepsis incidence using clinical criteria was stable (+0.6% relative change/y [95% CI, -2.3% to 3.5%], P = .67) whereas incidence per claims increased (+10.3%/y [95% CI, 7.2% to 13.3%], P < .001). In-hospital mortality using clinical criteria declined (-3.3%/y [95% CI, -5.6% to -1.0%], P = .004), but there was no significant change in the combined outcome of death or discharge to hospice (-1.3%/y [95% CI, -3.2% to 0.6%], P = .19). In contrast, mortality using claims declined significantly (-7.0%/y [95% CI, -8.8% to -5.2%], P < .001), as did death or discharge to hospice (-4.5%/y [95% CI, -6.1% to -2.8%], P < .001). Clinical criteria were more sensitive in identifying sepsis than claims (69.7% [95% CI, 52.9% to 92.0%] vs 32.3% [95% CI, 24.4% to 43.0%], P < .001), with comparable positive predictive value (70.4% [95% CI, 64.0% to 76.8%] vs 75.2% [95% CI, 69.8% to 80.6%], P = .23). Conclusions and relevance: In clinical data from 409 hospitals, sepsis was present in 6% of adult hospitalizations, and in contrast to claims-based analyses, neither the incidence of sepsis nor the combined outcome of death or discharge to hospice changed significantly between 2009-2014. The findings also suggest that EHR-based clinical data provide more objective estimates than claims-based data for sepsis surveillance. Weniger anzeigen

Objective: To provide an update to „Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012“. Design: A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. Methods: The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable. Results: The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions. Conclusions: Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality. Weniger anzeigen