ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: In the emergency department (ED), the early identification of patients suspected of infection is a challenge for emergency physicians. Sepsis prevalence among patients with suspected infection in the ED remains uncertain. Our objective was to determine how many cases of sepsis occurred among patients with suspected infections in the ED. METHODS: This multi-center, prospective, observational study was conducted in 19 EDs in France. For 1 week, all consecutive ED patients with suspected infection (according to the emergency physician) were included. The primary endpoint was the prevalence of sepsis in the ED according to the 'sepsis-3' definition. Secondary endpoints involved comparisons among patients with and without sepsis. RESULTS: During the study period, 13 904 patients were screened; 494 (3.6%) consulted for suspected infection and were included in the study. Among them, 172 patients [39%, 95% confidence interval (CI) (34-44)] were diagnosed with sepsis. The total hospital mortality for patients with a suspected infection was 4.7% and the hospital mortality for sepsis patients was 9.9%. CONCLUSION: In the ED, among patients with a suspected infection, the prevalence of sepsis as per the 'sepsis-3' definition was 39% [95% CI (34-44)].
Subject(s)
Sepsis , Emergency Service, Hospital , France/epidemiology , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Prevalence , Prospective Studies , Sepsis/diagnosis , Sepsis/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although both prehospital fibrinolysis and primary angioplasty provide a clinical benefit over in-hospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction, they have not been directly compared. Our aim was to find out whether primary angioplasty was better than prehospital fibrinolysis. METHODS: We did a randomised multicentre trial of 840 patients (of 1200 planned) who presented within 6 h of acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation, initially managed by mobile emergency-care units. We assigned patients to prehospital fibrinolysis (n=419) with accelerated alteplase or primary angioplasty (n=421), and transferred all to a centre with access to emergency angioplasty. Our primary endpoint was a composite of death, non-fatal reinfarction, and non-fatal disabling stroke at 30 days. Analyses were by intention to treat. FINDINGS: The median delay between onset of symptoms and treatment was 130 min in the prehospital-fibrinolysis group and 190 min (time to first balloon inflation) in the primary-angioplasty group. Rescue angioplasty was done in 26% of the patients in the fibrinolysis group. The rate of the primary endpoint was 8.2% (34 patients) in the prehospital-fibrinolysis group and 6.2% (26 patients) in the primary-angioplasty group (risk difference 1.96, 95% CI -1.53 to 5.46). 16 (3.8%) patients assigned prehospital fibrinolysis and 20 (4.8%) assigned primary angioplasty died (p=0.61). INTERPRETATION: A strategy of primary angioplasty was not better than a strategy of prehospital fibrinolysis (with transfer to an interventional facility for possible rescue angioplasty) in patients presenting with early myocardial infarction.