It Takes a Village - Atypical Presentation Warrants Teamwork for Sepsis Care

Sepsis is the body’s overwhelming response to infection that can lead to tissue damage, organ failure, and death. Sepsis, disproportionately, affects older adults due to an aging immune system and chronic illness. Older adults present atypically delaying diagnosis and intervention. This delay has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. However, with early detection and rapid treatment there can be a reduction in poor outcomes. It is key, that clinicians practice collaboration and communication when diagnosing & treating patients that may have a different presentation. Early detection, monitoring, and intervention are crucial to survival of the older septic patient. The Continuous Monitoring Unit (CMU) consists of RNs, who monitor telemetry, video, and the Sepsis BPA/Checklist 24 hours/7 days a week. These nurses evaluate all active ED and acute care BPA data points. With their specific training, they dismiss the irrelevant and align the significant data while looking for possible notes of infection. They do not act upon the BPA unless the patient meets criteria. If there is confirmation of the BPA, the nurse collaborates with the primary provider to initiate recommended sepsis care. Since the beginning of August 2021, the CMU RN is utilizing the Sepsis Checklist, a customized tool built into the EMR that allows the CMU nurse to monitor the key elements of the Sepsis Bundle and intervene concurrently to complete the CMS SEP1 recommendations. Recommendations are based on the Surviving Sepsis Campaign.

Designing Support Structures Post Sepsis in Children: Perspectives of the Queensland Paediatric Sepsis Program

Introduction: Paediatric post sepsis syndrome is poorly defined and causes physical, neurocognitive, psychosocial morbidity, and family dysfunction. Families of sepsis survivors report unmet needs during care. Worldwide, the provision of post sepsis care is in its infancy with limited evidence to design clinical support pathways.Perspective: The Queensland Paediatric Sepsis Program (QPSP) developed a family support structure (FSS) to improve care during all stages of childhood sepsis. It was designed in partnership with consumers guided by information from consumers and it is partly delivered by consumers. Key areas include online, multimodal education for families and the ability to connect with other families affected by sepsis. The FSS is delivered by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) acting with clinicians local to the child. Families can join the FSS registry at any stage of their sepsis journey which connects them to our MDT team and opens opportunities to participate in future research and other initiatives. Improving public awareness is a critical outcome for our consumers and they have co-designed media and digital campaigns.Discussion: The ideal FSS for post sepsis syndrome management is a clinical pathway designed in partnership with consumers of interventions proven to improve outcomes from sepsis that meets their requirements. The QPSP FSS is novel as it is co-designed with, and partly delivered by, consumers with interventions aimed to improve the entire spectrum of morbidities suffered by survivors and their families, not just physical sequelae. Evaluation is embedded in the program and outcomes will guide evolution of the FSS.

The Knowledge of Nursing Internship Program Students about Early Detection of Sepsis

Background: Sepsis is a life-threatening condition due to the failure of the body’s regulation of infection. Knowledge deficit is one of the barriers to early detection and initiation of sepsis care. Nursing internship program students as future nurses need to have sufficient knowledge about early detection of sepsis to support their behavior. Thus, the purpose of this study was to describe the knowledge of nursing internship program students regarding the early detection of sepsis and the demographic factor related to the knowledge. Methods: The study design was a quantitative study. Through the proportionate stratified non-random sampling technique, the researcher involved 143 nursing internship program students of Universitas Padjadjaran. Data collection used a questionnaire based on the Sepsis-3 guidelines to measure nursing internship program students’ knowledge about early detection of sepsis. The data was carried out in July-August 2021. Results: The average knowledge score of the respondents was 70.4 (SD=11.9). More than half of the respondents (56.6%) got a score below the average. Almost all respondents do not know the current definition of sepsis and still use the SIRS definition as clinical criteria for sepsis. However, respondents could identify clinical criteria for sepsis based on qSOFA and analyse sepsis indicators based on case scenarios. Meanwhile, based on its characteristics, the information is a factor that significantly affects the knowledge score (p < 0.05). Conclusion: In conclusion, there is still a gap in the knowledge of the nursing internship program students regarding the update of the Sepsis-3 guidelines. Besides, information is identified as the factor that influences knowledge. Therefore, it suggested that the institution provide further effective educational methods to update students’ knowledge about the early detection of sepsis.

CATalyst for Change: How Members of WellSpan’s Central Alert Team (CAT) Are Revolutionizing Sepsis Care

In the United States, almost 1 million patients with sepsis are admitted to hospitals annually, and the cost of managing sepsis admissions is higher than any other disease state.1 Early identification and treatment are critical for survival, though both are notoriously difficult as symptoms are often nonspecific. Four years ago, WellSpan Health asked, “What if there were a way to provide real-time, meaningful clinical decision support to bedside providers to identify sepsis sooner and start lifesaving treatment?” Meet Margaret D’Ercole, Patricia Everett, Dana Gaultney, Angela Mays, Brenna Simcoe, and Cynthia Yascavage, who share how their Central Alert Team decreased mortality rates, increased bundle compliance, and proved there is a better way.

Four consecutive yearly point-prevalence studies in Wales indicate lack of improvement in sepsis care on the wards

The ‘Sepsis Six’ bundle was promoted as a deliverable tool outside of the critical care settings, but there is very little data available on the progress and change of sepsis care outside the critical care environment in the UK. Our aim was to compare the yearly prevalence, outcome and the Sepsis Six bundle compliance in patients at risk of mortality from sepsis in non-intensive care environments. Patients with a National Early Warning Score (NEWS) of 3 or above and suspected or proven infection were enrolled into four yearly 24-h point prevalence studies, carried out in fourteen hospitals across Wales from 2016 to 2019. We followed up patients to 30 days between 2016–2019 and to 90 days between 2017 and 2019. Out of the 26,947 patients screened 1651 fulfilled inclusion criteria and were recruited. The full ‘Sepsis Six’ care bundle was completed on 223 (14.0%) occasions, with no significant difference between the years. On 190 (11.5%) occasions none of the bundle elements were completed. There was no significant correlation between bundle element compliance, NEWS or year of study. One hundred and seventy (10.7%) patients were seen by critical care outreach; the ‘Sepsis Six’ bundle was completed significantly more often in this group (54/170, 32.0%) than for patients who were not reviewed by critical care outreach (168/1385, 11.6%; p < 0.0001). Overall survival to 30 days was 81.7% (1349/1651), with a mean survival time of 26.5 days (95% CI 26.1–26.9) with no difference between each year of study. 90-day survival for years 2017–2019 was 74.7% (949/1271), with no difference between the years. In multivariate regression we identified older age, heart failure, recent chemotherapy, higher frailty score and do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation orders as significantly associated with increased 30-day mortality. Our data suggests that despite efforts to increase sepsis awareness within the NHS, there is poor compliance with the sepsis care bundles and no change in the high mortality over the study period. Further research is needed to determine which time-sensitive ward-based interventions can reduce mortality in patients with sepsis and how can these results be embedded to routine clinical practice.Trial registration Defining Sepsis on the Wards ISRCTN 86502304 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN86502304 prospectively registered 09/05/2016.

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: research priorities for the administration, epidemiology, scoring and identification of sepsis

Objective To identify priorities for administrative, epidemiologic and diagnostic research in sepsis. Design As a follow-up to a previous consensus statement about sepsis research, members of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Research Committee, representing the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Society of Critical Care Medicine addressed six questions regarding care delivery, epidemiology, organ dysfunction, screening, identification of septic shock, and information that can predict outcomes in sepsis. Methods Six questions from the Scoring/Identification and Administration sections of the original Research Priorities publication were explored in greater detail to better examine the knowledge gaps and rationales for questions that were previously identified through a consensus process. Results The document provides a framework for priorities in research to address the following questions: (1) What is the optimal model of delivering sepsis care?; (2) What is the epidemiology of sepsis susceptibility and response to treatment?; (3) What information identifies organ dysfunction?; (4) How can we screen for sepsis in various settings?; (5) How do we identify septic shock?; and (6) What in-hospital clinical information is associated with important outcomes in patients with sepsis? Conclusions There is substantial knowledge of sepsis epidemiology and ways to identify and treat sepsis patients, but many gaps remain. Areas of uncertainty identified in this manuscript can help prioritize initiatives to improve an understanding of individual patient and demographic heterogeneity with sepsis and septic shock, biomarkers and accurate patient identification, organ dysfunction, and ways to improve sepsis care.