Search

Objectives: Recent sepsis studies have defined patients as "infected" using a combination of culture and antibiotic orders rather than billing data. However, the accuracy of these definitions is unclear. We aimed to compare the accuracy of different established criteria for identifying infected patients using detailed chart review., Design: Retrospective observational study., Setting: Six hospitals from three health systems in Illinois., Patients: Adult admissions with blood culture or antibiotic orders, or Angus International Classification of Diseases infection codes and death were eligible for study inclusion as potentially infected patients. Nine-hundred to 1,000 of these admissions were randomly selected from each health system for chart review, and a proportional number of patients who did not meet chart review eligibility criteria were also included and deemed not infected., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: The accuracy of published billing code criteria by Angus et al and electronic health record criteria by Rhee et al and Seymour et al (Sepsis-3) was determined using the manual chart review results as the gold standard. A total of 5,215 patients were included, with 2,874 encounters analyzed via chart review and a proportional 2,341 added who did not meet chart review eligibility criteria. In the study cohort, 27.5% of admissions had at least one infection. This was most similar to the percentage of admissions with blood culture orders (26.8%), Angus infection criteria (28.7%), and the Sepsis-3 criteria (30.4%). Sepsis-3 criteria was the most sensitive (81%), followed by Angus (77%) and Rhee (52%), while Rhee (97%) and Angus (90%) were more specific than the Sepsis-3 criteria (89%). Results were similar for patients with organ dysfunction during their admission., Conclusions: Published criteria have a wide range of accuracy for identifying infected patients, with the Sepsis-3 criteria being the most sensitive and Rhee criteria being the most specific. These findings have important implications for studies investigating the burden of sepsis on a local and national level., Competing Interests: Drs. Churpek and Edelson received funding from National Institute of General Medical Sciences R01 GM123193; disclosed a patent pending (ARCD. P0535US. P2) for risk stratification algorithms for hospitalized patients and have received research support from EarlySense (Tel Aviv, Israel). Drs. Churpek, Winslow, Shah, and Afshar received support for article research from the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Afshar also received support from a K23 from National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism K23 AA024503. Dr. Edelson received support for article research from the American Heart Association (Dallas, TX) and Laerdal Medical (Stavanger, Norway), and she received research support from Philips Healthcare (Andover, MA). She disclosed ownership interest in Quant HC (Chicago, IL), which is developing products for risk stratification of hospitalized patients; she is president/co-founder and shareholder of AgileMD with licensing agreements with Philips Healthcare and EarlySense; and she is the chair for the American Heart Association Get with The Guidelines adult research task force. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Background: Early warning tools have been widely implemented without evidence to guide (a) recognition and (b) response team expertise optimisation. With growing databases from MET-calls and digital hospitals, we now have access to guiding information. The Queensland Adult-Deterioration-Detection-System (Q-ADDS) is widely used and requires validation., Aim: Compare the accuracy of Q-ADDS to National Early Warning Score (NEWS), Between-the-Flags (BTF) and the electronic Cardiac Arrest Risk Triage Score (eCART))., Methods: Data from the Chicago University hospital database were used. Clinical deterioration was defined as unplanned admission to ICU or death. Currently used NEWS, BTF and eCART trigger thresholds were compared with a clinically endorsed Q-ADDS variant., Results: Of 224,912 admissions, 11,706 (5%) experienced clinical deterioration. Q-ADDS (AUC 0.71) and NEWS (AUC 0.72) had similar predictive accuracy, BTF (AUC 0.64) had the lowest, and eCART (AUC 0.76) the highest. Early warning alert (advising ward MO review) had similar NPV (99.2-99.3%), for all the four tools however sensitivity varied (%: Q-ADDS = 47/NEWS = 49/BTF = 66/eCART = 40), as did alerting rate (% vitals sets: Q-ADDS = 1.4/NEWS = 3.5/BTF = 4.1/eCART = 3.4). MET alert (advising MET/critical-care review) had similar NPV for all the four tools (99.1-99.2%), however sensitivity varied (%: Q-ADDS = 14/NEWS = 24/BTF = 19/eCART = 29), as did MET alerting rate (%: Q-ADDS = 1.4/NEWS = 3.5/BTF = 4.1/eCART = 3.4). High-severity alert (advising advanced ward review, Q-ADDS only): NPV = 99.1%, sensitivity = 26%, alerting rate = 3.5%., Conclusion: The accuracy of Q-ADDS is comparable to NEWS, and higher than BTF, with eCART being the most accurate. Q-ADDS provides an additional high-severity ward alert, and generated significantly fewer MET alerts. Impacts of increased ward awareness and fewer MET alerts on actual MET call numbers and patient outcomes requires further evaluation., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sepsis remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, leading to the implementation of the Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Early Management Bundle (SEP-1). SEP-1 identifies patients with "severe sepsis" via clinical and laboratory criteria and mandates interventions, including lactate draws and antibiotics, within a specific time window. We sought to characterize the patients affected and to study the implications of SEP-1 on patient care and outcomes., Methods: All adults admitted to the University of Chicago from November 2008 to January 2016 were eligible. Modified SEP-1 criteria were used to identify appropriate patients. Time to lactate draw and antibiotic and IV fluid administration were calculated. In-hospital mortality was examined., Results: Lactates were measured within the mandated window 32% of the time on the ward (n = 505) compared with 55% (n = 818) in the ICU and 79% (n = 2,144) in the ED. Patients with delayed lactate measurements demonstrated the highest in-hospital mortality at 29%, with increased time to antibiotic administration (median time, 3.9 vs 2.0 h). Patients with initial lactates > 2.0 mmol/L demonstrated an increase in the odds of death with hourly delay in lactate measurement (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.0003-1.05; P = .04)., Conclusions: Delays in lactate measurement are associated with delayed antibiotics and increased mortality in patients with initial intermediate or elevated lactate levels. Systematic early lactate measurement for all patients with sepsis will lead to a significant increase in lactate draws that may prompt more rapid physician intervention for patients with abnormal initial values., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)