一家社区医院实施败血症护理改进计划前后败血症住院患者的治疗效果。

IF 1.1 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Journal of Pharmacy Technology Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-27 DOI:10.1177/87551225241283193
Kenneth J Richardson, Chanda L Mullen, Gretchen L Sacha, Erik M Wasowski
{"title":"一家社区医院实施败血症护理改进计划前后败血症住院患者的治疗效果。","authors":"Kenneth J Richardson, Chanda L Mullen, Gretchen L Sacha, Erik M Wasowski","doi":"10.1177/87551225241283193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> Prompt treatment of sepsis and septic shock is critical as delays increase mortality risk. Various tools, such as electronic alerts, standardized order sets, and rapid response teams, are used to expedite sepsis bundled care, yet their individual effects on outcomes and antimicrobial timing are unclear. This study evaluated the impact of an Inpatient Code Sepsis protocol, featuring an overhead page and order set, on mortality in hospitalized patients with sepsis and septic shock. <b>Methods:</b> A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a 371-bed hospital from July 1, 2020, to July 31, 2023. Hospitalized adults (≥18 years) diagnosed with sepsis and septic shock before and after the Inpatient Code Sepsis protocol implementation were included. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay, 30-day readmission, and time to antibiotic administration. Patients were excluded if they were identified for sepsis without infection, had sepsis due to non-bacterial causes, lost to follow-up within 30 days of admission, received empiric antibiotics in an emergency department or outside hospital, or were missing antibiotic administration time. <b>Results:</b> A total of 138 patients were included in the analysis. Mortality within 30 days did not significantly differ preprotocol and postprotocol (<i>p</i> = 0.381). However, a significant reduction in time to antibiotic administration was noted postimplementation (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Hospital length of stay and 30-day readmission showed no significant changes. <b>Conclusion:</b> The Inpatient Code Sepsis protocol did not impact 30-day mortality but did improve the time to antibiotic administration.</p>","PeriodicalId":16796,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmacy Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11536513/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients With Sepsis Before and After Implementation of a Sepsis Care Improvement Initiative at a Community Hospital.\",\"authors\":\"Kenneth J Richardson, Chanda L Mullen, Gretchen L Sacha, Erik M Wasowski\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/87551225241283193\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> Prompt treatment of sepsis and septic shock is critical as delays increase mortality risk. Various tools, such as electronic alerts, standardized order sets, and rapid response teams, are used to expedite sepsis bundled care, yet their individual effects on outcomes and antimicrobial timing are unclear. This study evaluated the impact of an Inpatient Code Sepsis protocol, featuring an overhead page and order set, on mortality in hospitalized patients with sepsis and septic shock. <b>Methods:</b> A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a 371-bed hospital from July 1, 2020, to July 31, 2023. Hospitalized adults (≥18 years) diagnosed with sepsis and septic shock before and after the Inpatient Code Sepsis protocol implementation were included. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay, 30-day readmission, and time to antibiotic administration. Patients were excluded if they were identified for sepsis without infection, had sepsis due to non-bacterial causes, lost to follow-up within 30 days of admission, received empiric antibiotics in an emergency department or outside hospital, or were missing antibiotic administration time. <b>Results:</b> A total of 138 patients were included in the analysis. Mortality within 30 days did not significantly differ preprotocol and postprotocol (<i>p</i> = 0.381). However, a significant reduction in time to antibiotic administration was noted postimplementation (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Hospital length of stay and 30-day readmission showed no significant changes. <b>Conclusion:</b> The Inpatient Code Sepsis protocol did not impact 30-day mortality but did improve the time to antibiotic administration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pharmacy Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11536513/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pharmacy Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/87551225241283193\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmacy Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/87551225241283193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:脓毒症和脓毒性休克的及时治疗至关重要,因为延误治疗会增加死亡风险。电子警报、标准化医嘱集和快速反应小组等各种工具被用于加快败血症捆绑式治疗,但它们对治疗结果和抗菌药物使用时机的影响尚不明确。本研究评估了住院病人脓毒症代码协议对脓毒症和脓毒性休克住院病人死亡率的影响,该协议的特点是采用了高架页面和医嘱集。研究方法2020 年 7 月 1 日至 2023 年 7 月 31 日,在一家拥有 371 张病床的医院开展了一项回顾性队列研究。研究纳入了在住院患者脓毒症代码协议实施前后被诊断为脓毒症和脓毒性休克的成人住院患者(≥18 岁)。主要结果是 30 天全因死亡率;次要结果是住院时间、30 天再入院率和使用抗生素的时间。如果患者被确认为无感染的败血症、非细菌原因导致的败血症、入院后 30 天内失去随访、在急诊科或医院外接受经验性抗生素治疗,或缺少抗生素用药时间,则不包括在内。研究结果共有 138 名患者纳入分析。协议前和协议后 30 天内的死亡率没有明显差异(P = 0.381)。但是,实施后抗生素用药时间明显缩短(p < 0.05)。住院时间和 30 天再入院率没有明显变化。结论:住院病人败血症代码协议并未影响 30 天死亡率,但确实缩短了使用抗生素的时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients With Sepsis Before and After Implementation of a Sepsis Care Improvement Initiative at a Community Hospital.

Purpose: Prompt treatment of sepsis and septic shock is critical as delays increase mortality risk. Various tools, such as electronic alerts, standardized order sets, and rapid response teams, are used to expedite sepsis bundled care, yet their individual effects on outcomes and antimicrobial timing are unclear. This study evaluated the impact of an Inpatient Code Sepsis protocol, featuring an overhead page and order set, on mortality in hospitalized patients with sepsis and septic shock. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a 371-bed hospital from July 1, 2020, to July 31, 2023. Hospitalized adults (≥18 years) diagnosed with sepsis and septic shock before and after the Inpatient Code Sepsis protocol implementation were included. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay, 30-day readmission, and time to antibiotic administration. Patients were excluded if they were identified for sepsis without infection, had sepsis due to non-bacterial causes, lost to follow-up within 30 days of admission, received empiric antibiotics in an emergency department or outside hospital, or were missing antibiotic administration time. Results: A total of 138 patients were included in the analysis. Mortality within 30 days did not significantly differ preprotocol and postprotocol (p = 0.381). However, a significant reduction in time to antibiotic administration was noted postimplementation (p < 0.05). Hospital length of stay and 30-day readmission showed no significant changes. Conclusion: The Inpatient Code Sepsis protocol did not impact 30-day mortality but did improve the time to antibiotic administration.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Pharmacy Technology
Journal of Pharmacy Technology PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
49
期刊介绍: For both pharmacists and technicians, jPT provides valuable information for those interested in the entire body of pharmacy practice. jPT covers new drugs, products, and equipment; therapeutic trends; organizational, legal, and educational activities; drug distribution and administration; and includes continuing education articles.
期刊最新文献
Implementation and Evaluation of APOTECAchemo in a Community Cancer Center: A Comparative Study of Robotic Versus Manual Antineoplastic Preparation. Implementation of Computerized Prescriber Order Entry Systems: A Review of Impacts, Barriers, and Facilitators. Adverse Effects Associated With Multimodal Analgesic Regimens in Critically Ill, Nonintubated Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients With Sepsis Before and After Implementation of a Sepsis Care Improvement Initiative at a Community Hospital. Potential Sampling Errors in Stability Studies Due to Dead Volume in Closed System Transfer Devices.
×
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