Impact of Sepsis Intervention Protocol (SIP) on Adherence to Three-hour and Six-hour Bundles and Mortality Outcomes in the Emergency Department.

Osagie Igiebor, Mohamed Nakeshbandi, Ninfa Mehta, Randi Ozaki, Michael Lucchesi, Maryanne Daley, Moro O Salifu, Samy I McFarlane
{"title":"Impact of Sepsis Intervention Protocol (SIP) on Adherence to Three-hour and Six-hour Bundles and Mortality Outcomes in the Emergency Department.","authors":"Osagie Igiebor,&nbsp;Mohamed Nakeshbandi,&nbsp;Ninfa Mehta,&nbsp;Randi Ozaki,&nbsp;Michael Lucchesi,&nbsp;Maryanne Daley,&nbsp;Moro O Salifu,&nbsp;Samy I McFarlane","doi":"10.15344/2456-8007/2020/149","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sepsis is a commonly encountered diagnosis affecting nearly 1.7 million adults in the USA annually. According to Center for Disease Control (CDC), over 270,000 Americans die of sepsis each year and 1 in 3 hospital mortalities is attributed to sepsis. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) Guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock published in 2004 provide key elements in the treatment of sepsis that are organized into two bundles of care, the \"resuscitation\" and \"management\" bundles, including interventions to be accomplished within specified timeframes. In this quality improvement study, we implemented a sepsis intervention protocol (SIP) intended to increase adherence to 3-hour and 6-hour bundles, and to examine the impact on mortality of patients presenting with severe sepsis and septic shock in our emergency department. We analyzed data from our emergency department as reported to the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) from 2017Q2 to 2018Q2 (April 2017 -June 2018), the period prior to implementation of SIP, compared to data from 2018Q3 to 2019Q2 (July 2018 to June 2019) after implementation of SIP. The implementation of SIP resulted in increased3-hour and 6-hour bundle adherence and showed a clinically significant reduction of the mean pre-intervention hospital percent mortality of 40.3% to a mean post-intervention hospital percent mortality of 28.7%. A t-test analysis of the pre and post intervention mean hospital percent mortality revealed a reduction in mortality outcomes that was also statistically significant (p <0.05). Our study demonstrates that a well-designed and implemented SIP can increase bundle adherence and is highly effective in reducing mortality among high-risk population.</p>","PeriodicalId":73437,"journal":{"name":"International journal of clinical research & trials","volume":"5 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of clinical research & trials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15344/2456-8007/2020/149","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Sepsis is a commonly encountered diagnosis affecting nearly 1.7 million adults in the USA annually. According to Center for Disease Control (CDC), over 270,000 Americans die of sepsis each year and 1 in 3 hospital mortalities is attributed to sepsis. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) Guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock published in 2004 provide key elements in the treatment of sepsis that are organized into two bundles of care, the "resuscitation" and "management" bundles, including interventions to be accomplished within specified timeframes. In this quality improvement study, we implemented a sepsis intervention protocol (SIP) intended to increase adherence to 3-hour and 6-hour bundles, and to examine the impact on mortality of patients presenting with severe sepsis and septic shock in our emergency department. We analyzed data from our emergency department as reported to the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) from 2017Q2 to 2018Q2 (April 2017 -June 2018), the period prior to implementation of SIP, compared to data from 2018Q3 to 2019Q2 (July 2018 to June 2019) after implementation of SIP. The implementation of SIP resulted in increased3-hour and 6-hour bundle adherence and showed a clinically significant reduction of the mean pre-intervention hospital percent mortality of 40.3% to a mean post-intervention hospital percent mortality of 28.7%. A t-test analysis of the pre and post intervention mean hospital percent mortality revealed a reduction in mortality outcomes that was also statistically significant (p <0.05). Our study demonstrates that a well-designed and implemented SIP can increase bundle adherence and is highly effective in reducing mortality among high-risk population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
脓毒症干预方案(SIP)对急诊科3小时和6小时捆绑治疗依从性和死亡率结果的影响
脓毒症是一种常见的诊断,每年影响美国近170万成年人。根据疾病控制中心(CDC)的数据,每年有超过27万美国人死于败血症,三分之一的医院死亡病例归因于败血症。2004年出版的《脓毒症生存运动(SSC)严重脓毒症和脓毒症休克管理指南》提供了脓毒症治疗的关键要素,分为两类护理,即“复苏”和“管理”,包括在规定时间内完成的干预措施。在这项质量改进研究中,我们实施了一项脓毒症干预方案(SIP),旨在提高3小时和6小时治疗包的依从性,并研究对急诊科出现严重脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者死亡率的影响。我们分析了2017年第二季度至2018年第二季度(2017年4月至2018年6月),即实施SIP之前,急诊科向纽约州卫生部(NYSDOH)报告的数据,并与实施SIP后的2018Q3至2019Q2(2018年7月至2019年6月)的数据进行了比较。SIP的实施增加了3小时和6小时捆绑治疗的依从性,并显示出临床显着降低了干预前平均医院死亡率40.3%到干预后平均医院死亡率28.7%。对干预前和干预后平均住院死亡率的t检验分析显示,死亡率结果的降低也具有统计学意义(p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Major Factors Affecting Oocyte Quality in IVF Cycles: A Narrative Review Mucormycosis as a Rare Infection in Lower Limb Necrotizing Fasciitis: A Case Report Effect of the Innominate Bone Horizontal Rotation on Acetabular Version: A Retrospective Radiological Study on a Middle Eastern Population Uveitis as a Manifestation of Celiac Disease: A Population-Based Study Differentiating Between Mass-forming Chronic Pancreatitis and Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Challenging Clinical Approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1