Objectives: There is mounting evidence that delays in appropriate antimicrobial administration are responsible for preventable deaths in patients with sepsis. Herein, we examine the association between potentially modifiable antimicrobial administration delays, measured by the time from the first order to the first administration (antimicrobial lead time), and death among people who present with new onset of sepsis. Design: Observational cohort and case-control study. Setting: The emergency department of an academic, tertiary referral center during a 3.5-year period. Patients: Adult patients with new onset of sepsis or septic shock. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: We enrolled 4,429 consecutive patients who presented to the emergency department with a new diagnosis of sepsis. We defined 0–1 hour as the gold standard antimicrobial lead time for comparison. Fifty percent of patients had an antimicrobial lead time of more than 1.3 hours. For an antimicrobial lead time of 1–2 hours, the adjusted odds ratio of death at 28 days was 1.28 (95% CI, 1.07–1.54; p = 0.007); for an antimicrobial lead time of 2–3 hours was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.85–1.36; p = 0.6); for an antimicrobial lead time of 3–6 hours was 1.57 (95% CI, 1.26–1.95; p < 0.001); for an antimicrobial lead time of 6–12 hours was 1.36 (95% CI, 0.99–1.86; p = 0.06); and for an antimicrobial lead time of more than 12 hours was 1.85 (95% CI, 1.29–2.65; p = 0.001). Conclusions: Delays in the first antimicrobial execution, after the initial clinician assessment and first antimicrobial order, are frequent and detrimental. Biases inherent to the retrospective nature of the study apply. Known biologic mechanisms support these findings, which also demonstrate a dose-response effect. In contrast to the elusive nature of sepsis onset and sepsis onset recognition, antimicrobial lead time is an objective, measurable, and modifiable process.
Background: Residencies are grappling with ways to identify methods to internally monitor and improve their learning environments. Building on prior work, the objective of this study was to determine emergency medicine (EM) internal evaluations of perceived organizational support and psychological safety and compare to the results from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Resident Survey for the purpose of program improvement and to explore factors affecting residents' perception of their learning environment.Results: Institutional response rates were 63% for the internal learning environment survey and 96% for ACGME Resident Safety Survey. EM residents responded positively on the SPOS and PSS compared to other programs (ranked second highest scores on both scales). One-hundred percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed on SPOS items: "Help is available from my department when I have a problem." "My department really cares about my well-being." "My department values my contribution to its well-being." Furthermore, EM had the highest overall training experience score (mean = 4.83) on the ACGME survey compared to the 18 other training programs. Qualitative responses suggest program strengths included supportive program leadership, positive working relationships with faculty, and emphasis on trainee wellness.Conclusions: Compared to other programs, EM has created a positive environment of safety and support as perceived by their residents. Internal surveys of the learning environment can help programs understand their culture for purposes of improvement and align with the ACGME survey.From the
Background: Rapid response teams (RRTs) have impacted the management of decompensating patients, potentially improving mortality. Few studies address the significance of RRT timing relative to hospital admission. We aimed to identify outcomes of adult patients who trigger immediate RRT activation, defined as within 4 hours of admission and compare with RRT later in admission or do not require RRT activation, and identify risk factors that predispose toward immediate RRT activation.Methods: A retrospective case-control study was performed using an RRTactivation database, comprising 201,783 adult inpatients at an urban, academic, tertiary care hospital. This group was subdivided by timing of RRT activation regarding admission: within the first 4 hours (immediate RRT), between 4 and 24 hours (early RRT), and after 24 hours (late RRT). The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality. Individuals triggering an immediate RRT were compared with demographically matched controls. Mortality was adjusted for age, Quick Systemic Organ Failure Assessment score, intensive care unit admission, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index.Results: Patients with immediate RRT had adjusted 28-day all-cause mortality of 7.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.6%-8.5%) and death odds ratio of 3.27 (95% CI, 2.5-4.3) compared with those who did not (mortality, 2.9%; 95%CI, 2.8%-2.9%; P < 0.0001). Patients triggering an immediate RRT were more likely to be Black, be older, and have higher Quick Systemic Organ Failure Assessment scores than those who did not trigger RRT activation. Conclusions:In this cohort, patients who require immediate RRT experienced higher 28-day all-cause mortality, potentially because of evolving or unrecognized critical illness. Further exploring this phenomenon may create opportunities for improved patient safety.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.