Search

We examined systems-level costs before and after the implementation of an emergency department paediatric sepsis screening, recognition and treatment pathway. Aggregated hospital admissions for all children aged < 18y with a diagnosis code of sepsis upon admission in Queensland, Australia were compared for 16 participating and 32 non-participating hospitals before and after pathway implementation. Monte Carlo simulation was used to generate uncertainty intervals. Policy impacts were estimated using difference-in-difference analysis comparing observed and expected results. We compared 1055 patient episodes before (77.6% in-pathway) and 1504 after (80.5% in-pathway) implementation. Reductions were likely for non-intensive length of stay (− 20.8 h [− 36.1, − 8.0]) but not intensive care (–9.4 h [− 24.4, 5.0]). Non-pathway utilisation was likely unchanged for interhospital transfers (+ 3.2% [− 5.0%, 11.4%]), non-intensive (− 4.5 h [− 19.0, 9.8]) and intensive (+ 7.7 h, [− 20.9, 37.7]) care length of stay. After difference-in-difference adjustment, estimated savings were 596 [277, 942] non-intensive and 172 [148, 222] intensive care days. The program was cost-saving in 63.4% of simulations, with a mean value of $97,019 [− $857,273, $1,654,925] over 24 months. A paediatric sepsis pathway in Queensland emergency departments was associated with potential reductions in hospital utilisation and costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To describe haemodynamic resuscitation practices in ED patients with suspected sepsis and hypotension. Methods: This was a prospective, multicentre, observational study conducted in 70 hospitals in Australia and New Zealand between September 2018 and January 2019. Consecutive adults presenting to the ED during a 30‐day period at each site, with suspected sepsis and hypotension (systolic blood pressure <100 mmHg) despite at least 1000 mL fluid resuscitation, were eligible. Data included baseline demographics, clinical and laboratory variables and intravenous fluid volume administered, vasopressor administration at baseline and 6‐ and 24‐h post‐enrolment, time to antimicrobial administration, intensive care admission, organ support and in‐hospital mortality. Results: A total of 4477 patients were screened and 591 were included with a mean (standard deviation) age of 62 (19) years, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score 15.2 (6.6) and a median (interquartile range) systolic blood pressure of 94 mmHg (87–100). Median time to first intravenous antimicrobials was 77 min (42–148). A vasopressor infusion was commenced within 24 h in 177 (30.2%) patients, with noradrenaline the most frequently used (n = 138, 78%). A median of 2000 mL (1500–3000) of intravenous fluids was administered prior to commencing vasopressors. The total volume of fluid administered from pre‐enrolment to 24 h was 4200 mL (3000–5661), with a range from 1000 to 12 200 mL. Two hundred and eighteen patients (37.1%) were admitted to an intensive care unit. Overall in‐hospital mortality was 6.2% (95% confidence interval 4.4–8.5%). Conclusion: Current resuscitation practice in patients with sepsis and hypotension varies widely and occupies the spectrum between a restricted volume/earlier vasopressor and liberal fluid/later vasopressor strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: There is uncertainty about the optimal i.v. fluid volume and timing of vasopressor commencement in the resuscitation of patients with sepsis and hypotension. We aim to study current resuscitation practices in EDs in Australia and New Zealand (the Australasian Resuscitation In Sepsis Evaluation: FLUid or vasopressors In Emergency Department Sepsis [ARISE FLUIDS] observational study). Methods: ARISE FLUIDS is a prospective, multicentre observational study in 71 hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. It will include adult patients presenting to the ED during a 30 day period with suspected sepsis and hypotension (systolic blood pressure <100 mmHg) despite at least 1000 mL fluid resuscitation. We will obtain data on baseline demographics, clinical and laboratory variables, all i.v. fluid given in the first 24 h, vasopressor use, time to antimicrobial administration, admission to intensive care, organ failure and in‐hospital mortality. We will specifically describe (i) the volume of fluid administered at the following time points: when meeting eligibility criteria, in the first 6 h, at 24 h and prior to vasopressor commencement and (ii) the frequency and timing of vasopressor use in the first 6 h and at 24 h. Screening logs will provide reliable estimates of the proportion of ED patients meeting eligibility criteria for a subsequent randomised controlled trial. Discussion: This multicentre, observational study will provide insight into current haemodynamic resuscitation practices in patients with sepsis and hypotension as well as estimates of practice variation and patient outcomes. The results will inform the design and feasibility of a multicentre phase III trial of early haemodynamic resuscitation in patients presenting to ED with sepsis and hypotension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]