Search

Objective: To describe the approach to the patients with suspected sepsis in the Spanish emergency department hospitals (ED) and analyze whether there are differences according to the size of the hospital and the number of visits to the emergency room., Methods: Structured survey of those responsible for the 282 public EDs that serve adults 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. It was asked about assistance and management in the emergency room in the care of patients with suspected sepsis. The results are compared according to hospital size (large ≥ 500 beds vs medium-small <500) and influx to the emergency room (discharge ≥ 200 visits / day vs medium-low <200)., Results: A total of 250 Spanish EDs responded (89%). Sepsis protocols are available in 163 (65%) EDs median weekly sepsis treated ranged from 0-5 per week in 39 (71%) ED, 6-10 per week in 10 (18%), 11-15 per week in 4 (7%), and more than 15 activations per week in 3 centers (3.6%). The criteria used for sepsis diagnosis were the qSOFA/SOFA in 105 (63.6%) of the hospitals, SIRS in 6 (3.6%), while in 49 (29.7%) they used both criteria simultaneously. In 79 centers, the sepsis diagnosis was computerized, and in 56 there were tools to help decision-making. 48% (79 of 163) of the EDs had data on bundles compliance. In 61% (99 of 163) of EDs there was training in sepsis and in 56% (55 of 99) it was periodic. Considering the size of the hospital, large hospitals participated more frequently as recipients of patients with sepsis and had an infectious, sepsis and short-stay unit, a microbiologist and infectious disease specialist on duty., Conclusions: Most EDs have sepsis protocols, but there is room for improvement. The computerization and development of alerts for diagnosis and treatment still have a long way to go in EDs., (©The Author 2022. Published by Sociedad Española de Quimioterapia. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).)

Objective: To determine the validity of the classic sepsis criteria or systemic inflammatory response syndrome (heart rate, respiratory rate, temperature, and leukocyte count) and the modified sepsis criteria (systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria plus glycemia and altered mental status), and the validity of each of these variables individually to predict 30-day mortality, as well as develop a predictive model of 30-day mortality in elderly patients attended for infection in emergency departments (ED)., Methods: A prospective cohort study including patients at least 75 years old attended in three Spanish university ED for infection during 2013 was carried out. Demographic variables and data on comorbidities, functional status, hemodynamic sepsis diagnosis variables, site of infection, and 30-day mortality were collected., Results: A total of 293 patients were finally included, mean age 84.0 (SD 5.5) years, and 158 (53.9%) were men. Overall, 185 patients (64%) fulfilled the classic sepsis criteria and 224 patients (76.5%) fulfilled the modified sepsis criteria. The all-cause 30-day mortality was 13.0%. The area under the curve of the classic sepsis criteria was 0.585 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.488-0.681; P=0.106], 0.594 for modified sepsis criteria (95% CI: 0.502-0.685; P=0.075), and 0.751 (95% CI: 0.660-0.841; P<0.001) for the GYM score (Glasgow <15; tachYpnea>20 bpm; Morbidity-Charlson index ≥3) to predict 30-day mortality, with statistically significant differences (P=0.004 and P<0.001, respectively). The GYM score showed good calibration after bootstrap correction, with an area under the curve of 0.710 (95% CI: 0.605-0.815)., Conclusion: The GYM score showed better capacity than the classic and the modified sepsis criteria to predict 30-day mortality in elderly patients attended for infection in the ED.