One-Hour Bundle Protocols for Surgical Sepsis and Septic Shock in Surgical Intensive Care Unit: Clinical Outcome Aspects in the Thai Context.

BACKGROUND: Surgical sepsis is a syndrome occurring during the perioperative period with a high mortality rate. Since the one-hour bundle protocol was recommended to decrease sepsis-related morbidity and mortality in clinical practice, the protocol has been applied to surgical patients with sepsis and septic shock. However, clinical outcomes in these surgical patients remain unknown. Thus, this study aimed to compare survival outcomes in patients before and after the implementation of one-hour bundle care in clinical practice. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, 401 surgical patients with sepsis were divided into two groups, with 195 patients undergoing the one-hour bundle from December 25, 2021, to March 31, 2024, and 206 patients undergoing usual care from January 1, 2018, to December 24, 2021, before the one-hour bundle protocol was implemented by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC). Demographic data, treatment processes, and clinical outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: After the one-hour bundle protocol was applied in surgical practice, the median survival time was significantly increased in surgical patients who underwent one-hour bundle care (95% confidence interval (CI): 12.32-19.68) (p= 0.016). Factors influencing the increase in the mortality rate were delays in fluid resuscitation of >2 hours, vasopressor initiation of >2 hours, and empirical antibiotics of >5 hours (p= 0.017, 0.028, and 0.008, respectively). CONCLUSION: One-hour bundle care for surgical patients with sepsis resulted in an increased median survival time. Delays in fluid resuscitation (>2 hours), vasopressor initiation (>2 hours), and empirical antibiotics (>5 hours) were factors associated with mortality.

Compliance with maternal sepsis guidelines in a tertiary hospital in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: Sepsis is a common cause of maternal mortality and morbidity. Early detection and rapid management are essential. In this study, we evaluate the compliance with the implemented maternity-specific Early Warning Score (EWS), Rapid Response Team (RRT) protocol and the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) Hour-1 Bundle in a tertiary hospital in the Netherlands. METHODS: We performed a retrospective patient chart review from July 2019 to June 2020 at the Leiden University Medical Centre. We included women who received therapeutic antibiotics and were admitted for at least 24 hours. RESULTS: We included 240 women: ten were admitted twice and one woman three times, comprising 252 admissions. A clinical diagnosis of sepsis was made in 22 women. The EWS was used in 29% (n = 73/252) of admissions. Recommendations on the follow-up of the EWS were carried out in 53% (n = 46/87). Compliance with the RRT protocol was highest for assessment by a medical doctor within 30 minutes (n = 98/117, 84%) and lowest for RRT involvement (n = 7/23, 30%). In women with sepsis, compliance with the SSC Bundle was highest for acquiring blood cultures (n = 19/22, 85%), while only 64% (n = 14/22) received antibiotics within 60 minutes of the sepsis diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The adherence to the maternity-specific EWS and the SSC Hour-1 bundle was insufficient, even within this tertiary setting in a high-income country.

Does Prehospital Suspicion of Sepsis Shorten Time to Administration of Antibiotics in the Emergency Department? A Retrospective Study in One University Hospital.

Early treatment is the mainstay of sepsis therapy. We suspected that early recognition of sepsis by prehospital healthcare providers may shorten the time for antibiotic administration in the emergency department. We retrospectively evaluated all patients above 18 years of age who were diagnosed with sepsis or severe infection in our emergency department between 2018 and 2020. We recorded the suspected diagnosis at the time of presentation, the type of referring healthcare provider, and the time until initiation of antibiotic treatment. Differences between groups were calculated using the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test. Of the 277 patients who were diagnosed with severe infection or sepsis in the emergency department, an infection was suspected in 124 (44.8%) patients, and sepsis was suspected in 31 (11.2%) patients by referring healthcare providers. Time to initiation of antibiotic treatment was shorter in patients where sepsis or infection had been suspected prior to arrival for both patients with severe infections (p = 0.022) and sepsis (p = 0.004). Given the well-described outcome benefits of early sepsis therapy, recognition of sepsis needs to be improved. Appropriate scores should be used as part of routine patient assessment to reduce the time to antibiotic administration and improve patient outcomes.

Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: What Have We Learned in the Last Two Decades?

Sepsis is a clinical syndrome encompassing physiologic and biological abnormalities caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. Sepsis progression into septic shock is associated with a dramatic increase in mortality, hence the importance of early identification and treatment. Over the last two decades, the definition of sepsis has evolved to improve early sepsis recognition and screening, standardize the terms used to describe sepsis and highlight its association with organ dysfunction and higher mortality. The early 2000s witnessed the birth of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT), which showed a dramatic reduction in mortality leading to its wide adoption, and the surviving sepsis campaign (SSC), which has been instrumental in developing and updating sepsis guidelines over the last 20 years. Outside of early fluid resuscitation and antibiotic therapy, sepsis management has transitioned to a less aggressive approach over the last few years, shying away from routine mixed venous oxygen saturation and central venous pressure monitoring and excessive fluids resuscitation, inotropes use, and red blood cell transfusions. Peripheral vasopressor use was deemed safe and is rising, and resuscitation with balanced crystalloids and a restrictive fluid strategy was explored. This review will address some of sepsis management's most important yet controversial components and summarize the available evidence from the last two decades.

Subclinical cardiac dysfunction may impact on fluid and vasopressor administration during early resuscitation of septic shock.

BACKGROUND: According to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) fluids and vasopressors are the mainstays of early resuscitation of septic shock while inotropes are indicated in case of tissue hypoperfusion refractory to fluids and vasopressors, suggesting severe cardiac dysfunction. However, septic cardiac disfunction encompasses a large spectrum of severities and may remain "subclinical" during early resuscitation. We hypothesized that "subclinical" cardiac dysfunction may nevertheless influence fluid and vasopressor administration during early resuscitation. We retrospectively reviewed prospectically collected data on fluids and vasoconstrictors administered outside the ICU in patients with septic shock resuscitated according to the SSC guidelines that had reached hemodynamic stability without the use of inotropes. All the patients were submitted to transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD) hemodynamic monitoring at ICU entry. Subclinical cardiac dysfunction was defined as a TPTD-derived cardiac function index (CFI) ≤ 4.5 min-1. RESULTS: At ICU admission, subclinical cardiac dysfunction was present in 17/40 patients (42%; CFI 3.6 ± 0.7 min-1 vs 6.6 ± 1.9 min-1; p < 0.01). Compared with patients with normal CFI, these patients had been resuscitate with more fluids (crystalloids 57 ± 10 vs 47 ± 9 ml/kg PBW; p < 0.01) and vasopressors (norepinephrine 0.65 ± 0.25 vs 0.43 ± 0.29 mcg/kg/min; p < 0.05). At ICU admission these patients had lower cardiac index (2.2 ± 0.6 vs 3.6 ± 0.9 L/min/m2, p < 0.01) and higher systemic vascular resistances (2721 ± 860 vs 1532 ± 480 dyn*s*cm-5/m2, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with septic shock resuscitated according to the SSC, we found that subclinical cardiac dysfunction may influence the approach to fluids and vasopressor administration during early resuscitation. Our data support the implementation of early, bedside assessment of cardiac function during early resuscitation of septic shock.

Risk of Misleading Conclusions in Observational Studies of Time-to-Antibiotics and Mortality in Suspected Sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Influential studies conclude that each hour until antibiotics increases mortality in sepsis. However, these analyses often (1) adjusted for limited covariates, (2) included patients with long delays until antibiotics, (3) combined sepsis and septic shock, and (4) used linear models presuming each hour delay has equal impact. We evaluated the effect of these analytic choices on associations between time-to-antibiotics and mortality. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 104 248 adults admitted to 5 hospitals from 2015-2022 with suspected infection (blood culture collection and intravenous antibiotics ≤24 h of arrival), including 25 990 with suspected septic shock and 23 619 with sepsis without shock. We used multivariable regression to calculate associations between time-to-antibiotics and in-hospital mortality under successively broader confounding-adjustment, shorter maximum time-to-antibiotic intervals, stratification by illness severity, and removing assumptions of linear hourly associations. RESULTS: Changing covariates, maximum time-to-antibiotics, and severity stratification altered the magnitude, direction, and significance of observed associations between time-to-antibiotics and mortality. In a fully adjusted model of patients treated ≤6 hours, each hour was associated with higher mortality for septic shock (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.04-1.11) but not sepsis without shock (aOR: 1.03; .98-1.09) or suspected infection alone (aOR: .99; .94-1.05). Modeling each hour separately confirmed that every hour of delay was associated with increased mortality for septic shock, but only delays >6 hours were associated with higher mortality for sepsis without shock. CONCLUSIONS: Associations between time-to-antibiotics and mortality in sepsis are highly sensitive to analytic choices. Failure to adequately address these issues can generate misleading conclusions.

The Association Between Time From Emergency Department Visit to ICU Admission and Mortality in Patients With Sepsis.

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines 2021 recommends that adult patients with sepsis requiring intensive care should be admitted to the ICU within 6 hours of their emergency department (ED) visits. However, there is limited evidence on whether 6 hours is the best target time for compliance with the sepsis bundle. We aimed to investigate the association between time from ED visits to ICU admission (i.e., ED length of stay [ED-LOS]) and mortality and identify the optimal ED-LOS for patients with sepsis. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care Emergency Department and Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV databases. PATIENTS: Adult patients (≥ 18 yr old) who were transferred from the ED to the ICU and subsequently diagnosed with sepsis based on the Sepsis-3 criteria within 24 hours of ICU admission. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 1,849 patients with sepsis, we found a disproportionally higher mortality rate in patients immediately admitted to the ICU (e.g., < 2 hr). When using ED-LOS as a continuous variable, ED-LOS was not significantly associated with 28-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [OR] per hour increase, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.96-1.13; p = 0.3) after an adjustment for potential confounders (e.g., demographics, triage vital signs, and laboratory results) in the multivariable analysis. However, when we categorized all patients into time quartiles (ED-LOS: < 3.3 hr, 3.3-4.5 hr, 4.6-6.1 hr, and > 6.1 hr), patients in the higher time quartiles (e.g., 3.3-4.5 hr) had higher 28-day mortality compared with those in the lowest time quartile (< 3.3 hr) (e.g., adjusted OR for patients in the second time quartile [3.3-4.5 hr] 1.59; 95% CI, 1.03-2.46; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Earlier admission to the ICU (e.g., within 3.3 hr of ED visits) was associated with lower 28-day mortality in patients with sepsis. Our findings suggest patients with sepsis who require intensive care may benefit from a more immediate ICU admission than 6 hours.

Implementing Pediatric Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines: Improving Compliance With Lactate Measurement in the PICU.

The 2020 pediatric Surviving Sepsis Campaign (pSSC) recommends measuring lactate during the first hour of resuscitation for severe sepsis/shock. We aimed to improve compliance with this recommendation for patients who develop severe sepsis/shock while admitted to the PICU. DESIGN: Structured, quality improvement initiative. SETTING: Single-center, 26-bed, quaternary-care PICU. PATIENTS: All patients with PICU-onset severe sepsis/shock from December 2018 to December 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Creation of a multidisciplinary local sepsis improvement team, education program targeting frontline providers (nurse practitioners, resident physicians), and peer-to-peer nursing education program with feedback to key stakeholders. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was compliance with obtaining a lactate measurement within 60 minutes of the onset of severe sepsis/shock originating in our PICU using a local Improving Pediatric Sepsis Outcomes database and definitions. The process measure was time to first lactate measurement. Secondary outcomes included number of IV antibiotic days, number of vasoactive days, number of ICU days, and number of ventilator days. A total of 166 unique PICU-onset severe sepsis/shock events and 156 unique patients were included. One year after implementation of our first interventions with subsequent Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, overall compliance increased from 38% to 47% (24% improvement) and time to first lactate decreased from 175 to 94 minutes (46% improvement). Using a statistical process control I chart, the preshift mean for time to first lactate measurement was noted to be 179 minutes and the postshift mean was noted to be 81 minutes demonstrating a 55% improvement. CONCLUSIONS: This multidisciplinary approach led to improvement in time to first lactate measurement, an important step toward attaining our target of lactate measurement within 60 minutes of septic shock identification. Improving compliance is necessary for understanding implications of the 2020 pSSC guidelines on sepsis morbidity and mortality.

Resuscitation in the First 3 Hours of Sepsis-Induced Hypotension Varies by Patient and Hospital Factors.

Patient and hospital factors affects how we resuscitate patients in the first 3 hours of sepsis-induced hypotension. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate variability in compliance to the 3-hour surviving sepsis campaign (SSC) bundle and explore the association of early compliance with subsequent shock and in-hospital mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study between September 2017 and February 2018. SETTING: Thirty-four academic medical centers. PARTICIPANTS: A subgroup sepsis-induced hypotensive patients from a larger shock cohort study. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Compliance to SSC bundle that was defined as receiving appropriate antibiotics, 30 mL/kg of crystalloid or initiation of vasopressors, and lactate, obtained in the first 3 hours following sepsis-induced hypotension. RESULTS: We included 977 patients with septic-induced hypotension. Bundle compliance was 43.8%, with the lowest compliance to fluid or vasopressor components (56%). Patients with high Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores and physiologic assessments were more likely to receive compliant care, as were patients with sepsis-induced hypotension onset in the emergency department (ED) or admitted to mixed medical-surgical ICUs. SSC compliance was not associated with in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.47-1.10). The site-to-site variability contributed to SSC compliance (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.15; 95% CI, 0.07-0.3) but not in-hospital mortality (ICC, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.001-0.24). Most patients remained in shock after 3 hours of resuscitation (SSC compliant 81.1% and noncompliant 53.7%). Mortality was higher among patients who were persistently hypotensive after 3 hours of resuscitation for both the SSC compliant (persistent hypotension 37% vs not hypotensive 27.2%; p = 0.094) and noncompliant (30.1% vs 18.2%; p = 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Patients with a higher severity of illness and sepsis-induced hypotension identified in the ED were more likely to receive SSC-compliant care. SSC compliance was not associated with in-hospital mortality after adjusting for patient- and hospital-level differences. Higher mortality is seen among those who remain in shock after initial resuscitation, regardless of SSC compliance.

Advances in Shock Management and Fluid Resuscitation in Children.

Shock in children is associated with significant mortality and morbidity, particularly in resource-limited settings. The principles of management include early recognition, fluid resuscitation, appropriate inotropes, antibiotic therapy in sepsis, supportive therapy for organ dysfunction, and regular hemodynamic monitoring. During the past decade, each step has undergone several changes and evolved as evidence that has been translated into recommendations and practice. There is a paradigm shift from protocolized-based care to personalized management, from liberal strategies to restrictive strategies in terms of fluids, blood transfusion, ventilation, and antibiotics, and from clinical monitoring to multimodal monitoring using bedside technologies. However, uncertainties are still prevailing in terms of the volume of fluids, use of steroids, and use of extracorporeal and newer therapies while managing shock. These changes have been summarized along with evidence in this article with the aim of adopting an evidence-based approach while managing children with shock.

The impact of a sepsis performance improvement program in the emergency department: a before-after intervention study.

PURPOSE: The latest Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines advocate that all hospitals use sepsis performance improvement programs. However, there is a limited evidence about how to structure such programs and what their potential impact is on sepsis management and outcomes in the emergency department (ED). In this study, we evaluated the implementation of a sepsis performance improvement program in the ED including a dedicated sepsis response team and analyzed the management and outcomes of sepsis patients before and after. METHODS: We conducted a before-after interventional study in the ED of the Amsterdam University Medical Centers, the Netherlands. The sepsis performance improvement program included regular educational meetings, daily audits and weekly feedback, a screening tool, and a dedicated multidisciplinary sepsis response team. We studied all adult patients who presented to the ED with a suspected infection and a Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) ≥ 3 during their stay. In the postintervention phase, these patients were seen by the sepsis team. Process-related and patient-related outcomes were measured between November 2019 and February 2020 (preintervention) and December 2021-May 2022 (postintervention). RESULTS: A total of 265 patients were included in the primary study, 132 patients preintervention and 133 patients postintervention. The postintervention phase was associated with improvements in nearly all process-related outcomes, such as a shorter time to antibiotics (66 vs. 143 min; p < 0.001), increased number of lactate measurements (72.9 vs. 46.2%; p < 0.001), and improved completeness of documented MEWS scores (85.0 vs. 62.9%; p < 0.001). Except for an improvement in the number of immediate versus delayed ICU admissions (100% immediate vs. 64.3% immediate; p = 0.012), there was no improvement in the other patient-related outcomes such as 28 days mortality (14.3 vs. 9.1%; p = 0.261), during the postintervention phase. CONCLUSION: Our program stimulated physicians to make timely decisions regarding diagnostics and treatment of sepsis in the ED. Implementing the sepsis performance improvement program was associated with significant improvements in most process-related outcomes but with minimal improvements in patient-related outcomes in our cohort.

Fluid bolus therapy in pediatric sepsis: a narrative review.

Leading cause of death in children under five, pediatric sepsis remains a significant global health threat. The 2020 Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines revised the management of septic shock and sepsis-associated organ dysfunction in children. In addition to empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics, fluid bolus therapy is one of the cornerstones of management, due to theoretical improvement of cardiac output, oxygen delivery and organ perfusion. Despite a very low level of evidence, the possible benefit of balanced crystalloids in sepsis resuscitation has led to discussion on their position as the ideal fluid. However, the latest adult data are not consistent with this, and the debate is still ongoing in pediatrics. We provide here the current state of knowledge on fluid bolus therapy in pediatric sepsis with emphasis on balanced crystalloids.

The Variation in Outcomes of Septic Patients: A Dual-Centre Comparative Study.

Introduction Despite significant advances in the field of medicine, sepsis is constantly growing as a major public health concern. The global epidemic of sepsis imposes a significant economic burden on healthcare systems world-over. Furthermore, its high prevalence in society is inevitably paralleled by an excessive mortality rate, with approximately six million deaths reported every year. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate and compare, the management of acutely septic patients against outcomes in a tertiary teaching institution in Pakistan versus a similar one in the United Kingdom. Methods This study was a dual-centred, retrospective comparative analysis comparing all patients admitted through the emergency department at the respective tertiary centres. Patient details were collected and compared across the two sites to evaluate the effect of individual characteristics on prognosis. The outcomes of these presentations were analysed by comparing rates of in-hospital mortality, admission to the ICU or discharge. Results The total number of patients identified as having sepsis was 60 in the Pakistan cohort, and 92 in the Aberdeen cohort. No significant difference was found when comparing genders, and the results of basic observations were largely similar at presentation. Twenty-five per cent (25%) (n=38) of the total study population were deemed to have a poor outcome at 3 days, but 50% of the Pakistan cohort was deemed to have a poor outcome. Conclusion Managing sepsis has developed significantly in recent years, but most of this development was implemented in high-income countries. There was a significant delay in time to resuscitate septic patients in Pakistan, with significantly raised three-day morbidity and mortality. There is a need for further comparative studies of the management of sepsis in Pakistan and other low-income countries to identify the problems and tackle obstacles on every level of the healthcare system.

Epidemiology of Community-Acquired Sepsis: Data from an E-Sepsis Registry of a Tertiary Care Center in South India.

The study aims to characterize community-acquired sepsis patients admitted to our 1300-bedded tertiary care hospital in South India from the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guideline-compliant e-sepsis registry stratified by focus of infection. The prospective observational study recruited 1009 adult sepsis patients presenting to the emergency department at the center based on Sepsis-2 criteria for a period of three years. Of the patients, 41% were between 61 and 80 years with a mean age of 57.37 ± 13.5%. A total of 13.5% (136) was under septic shock and in-hospital mortality for the study cohort was 25%. The 3 h and 6 h bundle compliance rates observed were 37% and 49%, respectively, without significant survival benefits. Predictors of mortality among patients with bloodstream infections were septic shock (p = 0.01, OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.23-4.79) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (p = 0.008, OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.009-1.066). The presence of Acinetobacter (p = 0.005, OR 4.07, 95% CI 1.37-12.09), Candida non-albicans (p = 0.001, OR16.02, 95% CI 3.0-84.2) and septic shock (p = 0.071, OR 2.5, 95% CI 0.97-6.6) were significant predictors of mortality in patients with community-acquired pneumonia. The registry has proven to be a key data source detailing regional microbial etiology and clinical outcomes of adult sepsis patients, enabling comprehensive evaluation of regional community-acquired sepsis to tailor institutional sepsis treatment protocols.

The Survival of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign.

Even well-intentioned policies have great potential to cause harm. This statement is vividly illustrated by the influential, yet controversial, Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines and subsequent CMS benchmarks. Despite low-quality evidence, tendentious industry ties, and rebuke from the Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA), these benchmarks continue to eschew therapy driven by clinician expertise and individual patient needs in favor of mandating an arbitrary, one-size-fits-all approach that suspends clinical judgment and promotes indiscriminate use of treatments that have the potential to cause great harm.

Prompt Identification of Sepsis on Hospital Floors: Are Healthcare Professionals Ready for the Implementation of the Hour-1 Bundle?

Early intervention in sepsis management with recognized therapeutic targets may be effective in lowering sepsis-related morbidity and mortality, although this necessitates timely identification of sepsis by healthcare professionals. The present study aimed to assess knowledge levels, attitudes, and agreement among physicians regarding the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines (more specifically, the Hour-1 bundle). A quantitative, descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted among physicians working in different clinical settings in Karachi, Pakistan, using a self-administered questionnaire. The mean cumulative knowledge score of the respondents towards SSC was 6.8 ± 2.1 (out of 10), where a total of n = 127 respondents (51.62%) had a strong understanding of the SSC guidelines, compared to n = 78 (31.7%) and n = 41 (16.7%) respondents with fair and inadequate knowledge, respectively. The majorly known bundle elements by the respondents were to administer broad-spectrum antibiotics (89.8%, n = 221), the need for taking blood cultures before administering antibiotics (87.8%, n = 216), and measurement of blood lactate levels (75.6%, n = 186). Experienced physicians were more likely to use norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor (p < 0.001). Female respondents were more likely to consider the duration of antibiotic therapy to be determined according to the site of infection, the microbiological etiology, the patient's response to treatment, and the likelihood of achieving adequate source control (p = 0.001). The current study concluded that respondents had an optimistic approach and frequently practice in accordance with the SSC guidelines, while some respondents were not up to date with the most recent guidelines. There is a need for further interventions and continuous medical education to encourage physicians towards appropriate use of the recommended guiding principles for improving treatment outcomes in sepsis patients.

Viewpoint: Weak Scientific Basis for the Recommendation of Executive Summary of Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines 2021.

The Executive summary of Sepsis 2021 was published recently, which for the first time, recommended that in septic shock, the vasopressor infusion should be commenced through a peripherally inserted venous catheter (PiVC) for up to 6 hours. We discuss the scientific basis for such a recommendation regarding the safety of vasopressor infusion through a peripherally inserted vascular catheter or the accepted duration. How to cite this article: Nath SS, Nachimuthu N. Viewpoint: Weak Scientific Basis for the Recommendation of Executive Summary of Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines 2021. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(8):898-899.

Relationship between time of emergency department admission and adherence to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign bundle in patients with septic shock.

BACKGROUND: Nighttime hospital admission is often associated with increased mortality risk in various diseases. This study investigated compliance rates with the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) 3-h bundle for daytime and nighttime emergency department (ED) admissions and the clinical impact of compliance on mortality in patients with septic shock. METHODS: We conducted an observational study using data from a prospective, multicenter registry for septic shock provided by the Korean Shock Society from 11 institutions from November 2015 to December 2017. The outcome was the compliance rate with the SSC 3-h bundle according to the time of arrival in the ED. RESULTS: A total of 2049 patients were enrolled. Compared with daytime admission, nighttime admission was associated with higher compliance with the administration of antibiotics within 3 h (adjusted odds ratio (adjOR), 1.326; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.088-1.617, p = 0.005) and with the complete SSC bundle (adjOR, 1.368; 95% CI, 1.115-1.678; p = 0.003), likely to result from the increased volume of all patients and sepsis patients admitted during daytime hours. The hazard ratios of the completion of SSC bundle for 28-day mortality and in-hospital mortality were 0.750 (95% CI 0.590-0.952, p = 0.018) and 0.714 (95% CI 0.564-0.904, p = 0.005), respectively. CONCLUSION: Septic shock patients admitted to the ED during the daytime exhibited lower sepsis bundle compliance than those admitted at night. Both the higher number of admitted patients and the higher patients to medical staff ratio during daytime may be factors that are responsible for lowering the compliance.

Risk factors and Compliance of surviving sepsis campaign: A retrospective cohort study at tertiary care hospital.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Sepsis is one of the leading causes of direct maternal mortality in Pakistan. It is recommended that the first three hours after the presentation are crucial. During this time implementation of surviving sepsis campaign resuscitation bundles reduces maternal mortality. Our objective was to assess the factors contributing to puerperal sepsis and the compliance of "surviving sepsis campaign resuscitation bundles in puerperal sepsis" for the management of puerperal sepsis. METHODS: This was a retrospective record review for five years from January 2011-December 2015. All women who fulfilled the inclusion criteria of puerperal sepsis were included and data from their files were collected and entered in SPSS version 19.0. Mean and standard deviations were calculated for continuous variables while for categorical variable proportion and percentages were used. RESULTS: This retrospective record review in five years showed the 396 patients had P-sepsis, among them 44 patients had severe sepsis with organ dysfunction. The culture was positive in 26(59%) with trend of E-coli in 9(20%) Among them 12(27%) had serum lactate more than ≥4mmol/L. Central venous pressure monitoring with fluid resuscitation was done as per protocol of survival bundle given to all 12(100%), Vasopressin was needed in half of these patients 6(50%). Amid 44 patients of severe sepsis 29(66%) were admitted to special care, while 15(34%) required intensive care admissions. Our 7(16%) patients failed to survive. All of them had multi-organ failure. CONCLUSION: There was moderate adherence of modified surviving sepsis campaign resuscitation bundles. Further improvement in compliance is warranted.

Temporal trends in the epidemiology, management, and outcome of sepsis-A nationwide observational study.

BACKGROUND: Registry-based studies have shown increasing incidence of sepsis and declining mortality rates in recent years, but are inherently at risk of bias. The objectives of this study were to describe 11-year trends in the incidence, treatment and outcome of sepsis using clinical criteria with chart review. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study. All adult admissions to Icelandic ICUs during years 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2016 were screened for severe sepsis or septic shock by ACCP/SCCM criteria (sepsis-2). Incidence, patient characteristics, treatment and outcome were compared across the study years. RESULTS: During the six study years, 9166 patients were admitted to Icelandic ICUs, 971 (10.6%) because of severe sepsis or septic shock. The crude incidence of sepsis requiring admission to ICU remained stable between 0.55 and 0.75 per 1000 inhabitants. No statistically significant trends were observed over time in median patient age (67 years), APACHE II score (21), SOFA score (8) or Charlson Comorbidity Index (4). The time to antibiotic administration (median 1.8 h) in the emergency departments was stable over the study period but the time to lactate measurements decreased from 4.1 h in 2006 to 1.2 h in 2016, p < .001. The 28-day mortality was 25% and 1-year mortality 41%, both with no observed change with time. CONCLUSIONS: In a nationwide cohort, diagnosed with clinical criteria, the incidence of sepsis requiring intensive care did not change over an 11-year period. Mortality remained stable and only minimal changes were observed in initial resuscitation in the emergency departments.