Search

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced the Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) as a pay-for-reporting measure in 2015 and is now planning to make it a pay-for-performance measure by incorporating it into the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program. This joint IDSA/ACEP/PIDS/SHEA/SHM/SIPD position paper highlights concerns with this change. Multiple studies indicate that SEP-1 implementation was associated with increased broad-spectrum antibiotic use, lactate measurements, and aggressive fluid resuscitation for patients with suspected sepsis but not with decreased mortality rates. Increased focus on SEP-1 risks further diverting attention and resources from more effective measures and comprehensive sepsis care. We recommend retiring SEP-1 rather than using it in a payment model and shifting instead to new sepsis metrics that focus on patient outcomes. CMS is developing a community-onset sepsis 30-day mortality electronic clinical quality measure (eCQM) that is an important step in this direction. The eCQM preliminarily identifies sepsis using systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, antibiotic administrations or diagnosis codes for infection or sepsis, and clinical indicators of acute organ dysfunction. We support the eCQM but recommend removing SIRS criteria and diagnosis codes to streamline implementation, decrease variability between hospitals, maintain vigilance for patients with sepsis but without SIRS, and avoid promoting antibiotic use in uninfected patients with SIRS. We further advocate for CMS to harmonize the eCQM with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Adult Sepsis Event surveillance metric to promote unity in federal measures, decrease reporting burden for hospitals, and facilitate shared prevention initiatives. These steps will result in a more robust measure that will encourage hospitals to pay more attention to the full breadth of sepsis care, stimulate new innovations in diagnosis and treatment, and ultimately bring us closer to our shared goal of improving outcomes for patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Globally, there are over 1 billion people infected with soil-transmitted helminths (STHs), mostly living in marginalized settings with inadequate sanitation in sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia. The World Health Organization recommends an integrated approach to STH morbidity control through improved access to sanitation and hygiene education and the delivery of preventive chemotherapy (PC) to school-age children delivered through schools. Progress of STH control programs is currently estimated using a baseline (pre-PC) school-based prevalence survey and then monitored using periodical school-based prevalence surveys, known as Impact Assessment Surveys (IAS). We investigated whether integrating geostatistical methods with a Markov model or a mechanistic transmission model for projecting prevalence forward in time from baseline can improve IAS design strategies. To do this, we applied these 2 methods to prevalence data collected in Kenya, before evaluating and comparing their performance in accurately informing optimal survey design for a range of IAS sampling designs. We found that, although both approaches performed well, the mechanistic method more accurately projected prevalence over time and provided more accurate information for guiding survey design. Both methods performed less well in areas with persistent STH hotspots where prevalence did not decrease despite multiple rounds of PC. Our findings show that these methods can be useful tools for more efficient and accurate targeting of PC. The general framework built in this paper can also be used for projecting prevalence and informing survey design for other neglected tropical diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]