Development of an Electronic Clinical Surveillance Measure for Unnecessary Rapid Antibiotic Administration in Suspected Sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Substantial efforts focus on monitoring and reducing delays in antibiotic treatment for sepsis, but little has been done to characterize the balancing measure of sepsis overtreatment. We aimed to establish preliminary validity and usefulness of electronic health record (EHR) data-derived criteria for sepsis overtreatment surveillance (SEP-OS). METHODS: We evaluated adults with potential sepsis (≥2 Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome criteria within 6 hours of arrival) presenting to the emergency department of 12 hospitals, excluding patients with shock. We defined SEP-OS as the proportion of patients receiving rapid IV antibiotics (≤3 hours) who did not ultimately meet the Centers for Disease Control Adult Sepsis Event "true sepsis" definition. We evaluated the frequency and characteristics of patients meeting overtreatment criteria and outcomes associated with sepsis overtreatment. RESULTS: Of 113 764 eligible patients, the prevalence of sepsis overtreatment was 22.5%. The measure met prespecified criteria for reliability, content, construct, and criterion validity. Patients classified by the SEP-OS overtreatment criteria had higher median antibiotic days (4 days [IQR, 2-5] vs 1 day [1-2]; P < .01), longer median length of stay (4 days [2-6] vs 3 days [2-5]; P < .01), higher hospital mortality (2.4% vs 2.1%; P = .01), and higher frequency of Clostridium difficile infection within 6 months of hospital discharge (P < .01) compared with "true negative" cases. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a novel, valid EHR metric for clinical surveillance of sepsis overtreatment. Applying this metric to a large cohort of potential sepsis patients revealed a high rate of overtreatment and provides a useful tool to inform sepsis quality-improvement targets.

Ideal Postdischarge Follow-Up After Severe Pneumonia or Acute Respiratory Failure: A Qualitative Study of Primary Care Clinicians in Diverse Settings.

BACKGROUND: Most patients discharged after hospitalization for severe pneumonia or acute respiratory failure receive follow-up care from primary care clinicians, yet guidelines are sparse. RESEARCH QUESTION: What do primary care clinicians consider to be ideal follow-up care after hospitalization for severe pneumonia or acute respiratory failure and what do they perceive to be barriers and facilitators to providing ideal follow-up? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted, via videoconferencing, semistructured interviews of 20 primary care clinicians working in diverse settings from five US states and Washington, DC. Participants described postdischarge visits, ongoing follow-up, and referrals for patients recovering from hospitalizations for pneumonia or respiratory failure bad enough to be hospitalized and to require significant oxygen support or seeking treatment at the ICU. Barriers and facilitators were probed using the capability, opportunity, motivation, behavior framework. Interview summaries and rigorous and accelerated data reduction analysis techniques were used. RESULTS: Core elements of primary care follow-up after severe pneumonia or acute respiratory failure included safety assessment, medication management, medical specialty follow-up, integrating the hospitalization into the primary care relationship, assessing mental and physical well-being, rehabilitation follow-up, and social context of recovery. Clinicians described specific practices as well as barriers and facilitators at multiple levels to optimal care. INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest that at least seven core elements are common in follow-up care after severe pneumonia or acute respiratory failure, and conventional systems include barriers and facilitators to delivering what primary care clinicians consider to be optimal follow-up care. Future research could leverage identified barriers and facilitators to develop implementation tools that enhance the delivery of robust follow-up care for severe pneumonia or acute respiratory failure.

Failure to Rescue as a Quality Measure in Sepsis.

This Viewpoint discusses the limitations of current tools to improve sepsis outcomes and proposes that these tools be supplemented with "failure to rescue," a systems-level approach for recognizing and addressing complications and managing sepsis throughout the hospitalization period.

Prediction of Readmission Following Sepsis Using Social Determinants of Health.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the predictive value of social determinants of health (SDoH) variables on 30-day readmission following a sepsis hospitalization as compared with traditional clinical variables. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective cohort study using patient-level data, including demographic, clinical, and survey data. SETTINGS: Thirty-five hospitals across the United States from 2017 to 2021. PATIENTS: Two hundred seventy-one thousand four hundred twenty-eight individuals in the AllofUs initiative, of which 8909 had an index sepsis hospitalization. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Unplanned 30-day readmission to the hospital. Multinomial logistic regression models were constructed to account for survival in determination of variables associate with 30-day readmission and are presented as adjusted odds rations (aORs). Of the 8909 sepsis patients in our cohort, 21% had an unplanned hospital readmission within 30 days. Median age (interquartile range) was 54 years (41-65 yr), 4762 (53.4%) were female, and there were self-reported 1612 (18.09%) Black, 2271 (25.49%) Hispanic, and 4642 (52.1%) White individuals. In multinomial logistic regression models accounting for survival, we identified that change to nonphysician provider type due to economic reasons (aOR, 2.55 [2.35-2.74]), delay of receiving medical care due to lack of transportation (aOR, 1.68 [1.62-1.74]), and inability to afford flow-up care (aOR, 1.59 [1.52-1.66]) were strongly and independently associated with a 30-day readmission when adjusting for survival. Patients who lived in a ZIP code with a high percentage of patients in poverty and without health insurance were also more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (aOR, 1.26 [1.22-1.29] and aOR, 1.28 [1.26-1.29], respectively). Finally, we found that having a primary care provider and health insurance were associated with low odds of an unplanned 30-day readmission. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter retrospective cohort, several SDoH variables were strongly associated with unplanned 30-day readmission. Models predicting readmission following sepsis hospitalization may benefit from the addition of SDoH factors to traditional clinical variables.

Health system approaches to providing posthospital care for survivors of sepsis and critical illness.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In the current review, we highlight developing strategies taken by healthcare systems to improve posthospital outcomes for sepsis and critical illness. RECENT FINDINGS: Multiple studies conducted in the adult population over the last 18 months have advanced current knowledge on postdischarge care after sepsis and critical illness. Effective interventions are complex and multicomponent, targeting the multilevel challenges that survivors face. Health systems can leverage existing care models such as primary care or invest in specialty programs to deliver postdischarge care. Qualitative and implementation science studies provide insights into important contextual factors for program success. Several studies demonstrate successful application of telehealth to improve reach of postdischarge support. Research is beginning to identify subtypes of survivors that may respond to tailored intervention strategies. SUMMARY: Several successful critical illness survivor models of care have been implemented and knowledge about effectiveness, cost, and implementation factors of these strategies is growing. Further innovation is needed in intervention development and evaluation to advance the field.

State of research in adult Hospital Medicine: Updated results of a national survey and longitudinal analysis of national data.

We sought to understand the current state of research in adult Hospital Medicine by repeating a 2018 survey of leaders in Hospital Medicine with changes to improve the response rate of surveyed programs. We also analyzed the public sources of federal research funding and MEDLINE-indexed publications from 2010 through 2019 among members of the Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM). Of the 102 contacted leaders of Hospital Medicine groups across the country, 49 responded, for a total response rate of 48%. Among the 3397 faculty members represented in responding programs, 72 (2%) of faculty were identified as conducting research for more than 50% of their time. Respondents noted difficulties at every stage of the research development pipeline, from a lack of mentors to running a fellowship program to a lack of applicants seeking further research training. Improvements to our research training pipeline will be essential to the long-term improvement of our profession.

A Quantitative Study of Decision Thresholds for Initiation of Antibiotics in Suspected Sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians' decision thresholds for initiating antibiotics in patients with suspected sepsis have not been quantified. We aimed to define an average threshold of infection likelihood at which clinicians initiate antibiotics when treating a patient with suspected infection and to evaluate the influence of severity of illness and clinician-related factors on the threshold. DESIGN: This was a prospective survey of 153 clinicians responding to 8 clinical vignettes constructed from real-world data from 3 health care systems in the United States. We treated each hour in the vignette as a decision to treat or not treat with antibiotics and assigned an infection probability to each hour using a previously developed infection prediction model. We then estimated decision thresholds using regression models based on the timing of antibiotic initiation. We compared thresholds across categories of severity of illness and clinician-related factors. RESULTS: Overall, the treatment threshold occurred at a 69% probability of infection, but the threshold varied significantly across severity of illness categories-when patients had high severity of illness, the treatment threshold occurred at a 55% probability of infection; when patients had intermediate severity, the threshold for antibiotic initiation occurred at an infection probability of 69%, and the threshold was 84% when patients had low severity of illness (P < 0.001 for group differences). Thresholds differed significantly across specialty, highest among infectious disease and lowest among emergency medicine clinicians and across years of experience, decreasing with increasing years of experience. CONCLUSIONS: The threshold infection probability above which physicians choose to initiate antibiotics in suspected sepsis depends on illness severity as well as clinician factors. IMPLICATIONS: Incorporating these context-dependent thresholds into discriminating and well-calibrated models will inform the development of future sepsis clinical decision support systems. Clinician-related differences in treatment thresholds suggests potential unwarranted variation and opportunities for performance improvement. HIGHLIGHTS: Decision making about antibiotic initiation in suspected sepsis occurs under uncertainty, and little is known about clinicians' thresholds for treatment.In this prospective study, 153 clinicians from 3 health care systems reviewed 8 real-world clinical vignettes representing patients with sepsis and indicated the time that they would initiate antibiotics.Using a model-based approach, we estimated decision thresholds and found that thresholds differed significantly across illness severity categories and by clinician specialty and years of experience.

Clinical Subtypes of Sepsis Survivors Predict Readmission and Mortality after Hospital Discharge.

Rationale: Sepsis survivors experience adverse outcomes including high rates of postdischarge mortality and rehospitalization. Given the heterogeneity of the condition, using a person-centered framework to identify subtypes within this population with different risks of postdischarge outcomes may optimize postsepsis care. Objectives: To classify individuals into subtypes and assess the association of subtypes with 30-day rehospitalization and mortality. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study between January 2014 and October 2017 among 20,745 patients admitted to one of 12 southeastern U.S. hospitals with a clinical definition of sepsis. We used latent class analysis to classify sepsis survivors into subtypes, which were evaluated against 30-day readmission and mortality rates using a specialized regression approach. A secondary analysis evaluated subtypes against readmission rate for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions. Results: Among 20,745 patients, latent class analysis identified five distinct subtypes as the optimal solution. Clinical subtype was associated with 30-day readmission, with the subtype existing poor health with severe illness and complex needs after discharge demonstrating highest risk (35%) and the subtype low risk, barriers to care demonstrating the lowest risk (9%). Forty-seven percent of readmissions in the subtype poor functional status were for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions, whereas 17% of readmissions in the subtype previously healthy with severe illness and complex needs after discharge, barriers to care were for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions. Subtype was significantly associated with 30-day mortality: highest in for existing poor health with severe illness and complex needs after discharge (8%) and lowest for low risk, barriers to care (0.1%). Conclusions: Sepsis survivors can be classified into subtypes representing nuanced constellations of characteristics, with differential 30-day mortality and readmission risk profiles. Predischarge classification may allow an individualized approach to postsepsis care.

Weaning Analgosedation in Patients Requiring Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation.

Although research supports the minimization of sedation in mechanically ventilated patients, many patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) receive prolonged opioid and sedative infusions. ICU teams face the challenge of weaning these medications, balancing the risks of sedation with the potential to precipitate withdrawal symptoms. In this article, we use a clinical case to discuss our approach to weaning analgosedation in patients recovering from long-term mechanical ventilation. We believe that a protocolized, multimodal weaning strategy implemented by a multidisciplinary care team is required to reduce potential harm from both under- and over-sedation. At present, there is no strong randomized clinical trial evidence to support a particular weaning strategy in adult ICU patients, but appraisal of the existing literature in adults and children can guide decision-making to enhance the recovery of these patients.

Effect of a Multicomponent Sepsis Transition and Recovery Program on Mortality and Readmissions After Sepsis: The Improving Morbidity During Post-Acute Care Transitions for Sepsis Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether a nurse navigator-led, multicomponent Sepsis Transition And Recovery program improves 30-day mortality and readmission outcomes after sepsis hospitalization. DESIG: n: Multisite pragmatic randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Three hospitals in North Carolina from January 2019 to March 2020. PATIENTS: Eligible patients hospitalized for suspected sepsis and deemed high-risk for mortality or readmission by validated internal risk models. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive usual care alone (i.e., routine transition support, outpatient care; n = 342) or additional Sepsis Transition And Recovery support (n = 349). The 30-day intervention involved a multicomponent transition service led by a nurse navigator through telephone and electronic health record communication to facilitate best practice postsepsis care strategies during and after hospitalization including: postdischarge medication review, evaluation for new impairments or symptoms, monitoring comorbidities, and palliative care approach when appropriate. Clinical oversight was provided by a Hospital Medicine Transition Services team. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was a composite of mortality or hospital readmission at 30 days. Logistic regression models were constructed to evaluate marginal and conditional odds ratios (adjusted for prognostic covariates: age, comorbidity, and organ dysfunction at enrollment). Among 691 randomized patients (mean age = 63.7 ± 15.1 yr; 52% female), a lower percentage of patients in the Sepsis Transition And Recovery group experienced the primary outcome compared with the usual care group (28.7% vs 33.3%; risk difference, 4.7%; odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.58-1.11; adjusted odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98). There were 74 deaths (Sepsis Transition And Recovery: 33 [9.5%] vs usual care: 41 [12.0%]) and 155 rehospitalizations (Sepsis Transition And Recovery: 71 [20.3%] vs usual care: 84 [24.6%]). CONCLUSIONS: In a multisite randomized clinical trial of patients hospitalized with sepsis, patients provided with a 30-day program using a nurse navigator to provide best practices for postsepsis care experienced a lower proportion of either mortality or rehospitalization within 30 days after discharge. Further research is needed to understand the contextual factors associated with successful implementation.

Deficits in Identification of Goals and Goal-Concordant Care After Sepsis Hospitalization.

In a recent study, identifying and supporting patients' care goals was named the highest priority in hospital medicine. Although sepsis is one of the leading causes of death and postdischarge morbidity among hospitalized patients, little is known about how frequently care goals are assessed prior to discharge and adhered to in the 90 days after sepsis hospitalization. Evaluating a cohort of 679 high-risk sepsis survivors enrolled in a clinical trial, we found that care goals were documented explicitly in a standardized tool in 130 patients; an additional 139 patients were identified using all available clinical documentation, resulting in only 269 (40%) patients with goals that could be ascertained from the electronic health record (EHR). Among those categorized, goals were classified as prioritizing longevity (35%), function (52%), and comfort (12%). Based on expert review of the care provided during the 90 days subsequent to discharge, goal-concordant care was identified in 184 (68%) cases for which goals were specified. Documentation of goals in a standardized EHR tool was associated with increased likelihood of receiving goal-concordant care (odds ratio, 3.6; 95% CI, 2.4-5.5). Hospitalization and peridischarge time points represent important opportunities to address deficits in the documentation of goals and provision of goal-concordant care for sepsis survivors.

Family Presence for Critically Ill Patients During a Pandemic.

Family engagement is a key component of high-quality critical care, with known benefits for patients, care teams, and family members themselves. The COVID-19 pandemic led to rapid enactment of prohibitions or restrictions on visitation that now persist, particularly for patients with COVID-19. Reevaluation of these policies in response to advances in knowledge and resources since the early pandemic is critical because COVID-19 will continue to be a public health threat for months to years, and future pandemics are likely. This article reviews rationales and evidence for restricting or permitting family members' physical presence and provides broad guidance for health care systems to develop and implement policies that maximize benefit and minimize risk of family visitation during COVID-19 and future similar public health crises.

First-to-second antibiotic delay and hospital mortality among emergency department patients with suspected sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether delay between the first and second antibiotic administered for suspected sepsis is associated with hospital mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Twelve hospitals in Southeastern United States from 2014 to 2017. PATIENTS: 25,717 adults with suspected sepsis presenting to 12 Emergency Departments who received at least two antibiotics within 12 h. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary exposure was first-to-second antibiotic delay >1 h. We used generalized linear mixed models to model the association between first-to-second antibiotic delay and hospital death in the overall cohort, and in subgroups of patients with and without septic shock. Overall, 13,852 (54%) patients had first-to-second antibiotic delay >1 h and 1666 (7%) died. Adjusting for other risk factors, first-to-second antibiotic delay was associated with increased risk of hospital death in the subgroup of patients with septic shock (OR 1.34; 95% CI: 1.05-1.70), but not among patients without shock (OR 0.99; 95% CI: 0.88-1.12) or in the overall cohort (OR 1.08; 95% CI: 0.97-1.20). CONCLUSIONS: First-to-second antibiotic delay of greater than one hour was associated with an increased risk of hospital death among patients meeting criteria for septic shock but not all patients with suspected sepsis. Tracking and improving first-to-second antibiotic delays may be considered in septic shock.

The Association Between Antibiotic Delay Intervals and Hospital Mortality Among Patients Treated in the Emergency Department for Suspected Sepsis.

OBJECTIVES: Rapid delivery of antibiotics is a cornerstone of sepsis therapy, although time targets for specific components of antibiotic delivery are unknown. We quantified time intervals comprising the task of antibiotic delivery and evaluated the association between interval delays and hospital mortality among patients treated in the emergency department for suspected sepsis. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Twelve hospitals in Southeastern United States from 2014 to 2017. PATIENTS: Twenty-four thousand ninety-three encounters among 20,026 adults with suspected sepsis in 12 emergency departments. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We divided antibiotic administration into two intervals: time from emergency department triage to antibiotic order (recognition delay) and time from antibiotic order to infusion (administration delay). We used generalized linear mixed models to evaluate associations between these intervals and hospital mortality. Median time from emergency department triage to antibiotic administration was 3.4 hours (interquartile range, 2.0-6.0 hr), separated into a median recognition delay (time from emergency department triage to antibiotic order) of 2.7 hours(interquartile range, 1.5-4.7 hr) and median administration delay (time from antibiotic order to infusion) of 0.6 hours (0.3-1.2 hr). Adjusting for other risk factors, both recognition delay and administration delay were associated with mortality, but pairwise comparison with a no-delay reference group was not significant for up to 6 hours of recognition delay or up to 1.5 hours of administration delay. CONCLUSIONS: Both recognition delays and administration delays were associated with increased hospital mortality, but only for longer delays. These results suggest that both metrics may be important to measure and improve for patients with suspected sepsis but do not support targets less than 1 hour.