Comparison of Sepsis Definitions as Automated Criteria.


Journal

Critical care medicine
ISSN: 1530-0293
Titre abrégé: Crit Care Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0355501

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 04 2021
Historique:
pubmed: 17 2 2021
medline: 24 8 2021
entrez: 16 2 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Assess the impact of heterogeneity among established sepsis criteria (Sepsis-1, Sepsis-3, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Adult Sepsis Event, and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid severe sepsis core measure 1) through the comparison of corresponding sepsis cohorts. Retrospective analysis of data extracted from electronic health record. Single, tertiary-care center in St. Louis, MO. Adult, nonsurgical inpatients admitted between January 1, 2012, and January 6, 2018. None. In the electronic health record data, 286,759 encounters met inclusion criteria across the study period. Application of established sepsis criteria yielded cohorts varying in prevalence: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Adult Sepsis Event (4.4%), Centers for Medicare and Medicaid severe sepsis core measure 1 (4.8%), International Classification of Disease code (7.2%), Sepsis-3 (7.5%), and Sepsis-1 (11.3%). Between the two modern established criteria, Sepsis-3 (n = 21,550) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Adult Sepsis Event (n = 12,494), the size of the overlap was 7,763. The sepsis cohorts also varied in time from admission to sepsis onset (hr): Sepsis-1 (2.9), Sepsis-3 (4.1), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Adult Sepsis Event (4.6), and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid severe sepsis core measure 1 (7.6); sepsis discharge International Classification of Disease code rate: Sepsis-1 (37.4%), Sepsis-3 (40.1%), Centers for Medicare and Medicaid severe sepsis core measure 1 (48.5%), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Adult Sepsis Event (54.5%); and inhospital mortality rate: Sepsis-1 (13.6%), Sepsis-3 (18.8%), International Classification of Disease code (20.4%), Centers for Medicare and Medicaid severe sepsis core measure 1 (22.5%), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Adult Sepsis Event (24.1%). The application of commonly used sepsis definitions on a single population produced sepsis cohorts with low agreement, significantly different baseline demographics, and clinical outcomes.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33591014
doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004875
pii: 00003246-202104000-00030
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e433-e443

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Dr. Michelson received funding as a shareholder of Pfizer. Dr. Lai received funding as a shareholder of Altria Group, Apple, Berkshire Hathaway, Barnes Group, Carnival Corp, Citigroup, Johnson & Johnson, Verizon Communications, Walt Disney, Royal Caribbean Cruises, Caterpillar, McDonald’s Corp, Ubiquiti, Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies, and Yum! Brands. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.

Références

Torio C, Moore BJ. National Inpatient Hospital Costs: The Most Expensive Conditions by Payer, 2013, Statistical Brief #204. Rockville, MD, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2006
Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016; 315:801–810
Saria S, Henry KE. Too many definitions of sepsis: Can machine learning leverage the electronic health record to increase accuracy and bring consensus? Crit Care Med. 2020; 48:137–141
Bone RC, Balk RA, Cerra FB, et al. Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM consensus conference committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest. 1992; 101:1644–1655
Levy MM, Fink MP, Marshall JC, et al. International Sepsis Definitions Conference2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS international sepsis definitions conference. Intensive Care Med. 2003; 29:530–538
Vincent JL. Dear SIRS, I’m sorry to say that I don’t like you. Crit Care Med. 1997; 25:372–374
Churpek MM, Zadravecz FJ, Winslow C, et al. Incidence and prognostic value of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome and organ dysfunctions in ward patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015; 192:958–964
Kaukonen KM, Bailey M, Pilcher D, et al. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria in defining severe sepsis. N Engl J Med. 2015; 372:1629–1638
The Joint Commission: Specifications Manual for National Hospital Inpatient Quality Measures. Washington, DC. Joint Commission. 2014
Seymour CW, Liu VX, Iwashyna TJ, et al. Assessment of clinical criteria for sepsis: For the third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016; 315:762–774
Rhee C, Dantes R, Epstein L, et al. CDC Prevention Epicenter ProgramIncidence and trends of sepsis in US hospitals using clinical vs claims data, 2009-2014. JAMA. 2017; 318:1241–1249
Simpson SQ. New sepsis criteria: A change we should not make. Chest. 2016; 149:1117–1118
Simpson SQ. SIRS in the time of sepsis-3. Chest. 2018; 153:34–38
Townsend SR, Rivers E, Tefera L. Definitions for sepsis and septic shock. JAMA. 2016; 316:457–458
Angus DC, Seymour CW, Coopersmith CM, et al. A framework for the development and interpretation of different sepsis definitions and clinical criteria. Crit Care Med. 2016; 44:e113–e121
Fang X, Wang Z, Yang J, et al. Clinical evaluation of sepsis-1 and sepsis-3 in the ICU. Chest. 2018; 153:1169–1176
Cheng B, Li Z, Wang J, et al. Comparison of the performance between sepsis-1 and sepsis-3 in ICUs in China: A retrospective multicenter study. Shock. 2017; 48:301–306
Szakmany T, Pugh R, Kopczynska M, et al. Welsh Digital Data Collection Platform CollaboratorsDefining sepsis on the wards: Results of a multi-centre point-prevalence study comparing two sepsis definitions. Anaesthesia. 2018; 73:195–204
Poutsiaka DD, Porto MC, Perry WA, et al. Prospective observational study comparing sepsis-2 and sepsis-3 definitions in predicting mortality in critically ill patients. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019; 6:ofz271
Serafim R, Gomes JA, Salluh J, et al. A comparison of the quick-SOFA and systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria for the diagnosis of sepsis and prediction of mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest. 2018; 153:646–655
Gando S, Shiraishi A, Abe T, et al. Japanese Association for Acute Medicine (JAAM) Sepsis Prognostication in Intensive Care Unit and Emergency Room (SPICE) (JAAM SPICE) Study GroupThe SIRS criteria have better performance for predicting infection than qSOFA scores in the emergency department. Sci Rep. 2020; 10:8095
Johnson AEW, Aboab J, Raffa JD, et al. A comparative analysis of sepsis identification methods in an electronic database. Crit Care Med. 2018; 46:494–499
Henry KE, Hager DN, Osborn TM, et al. Comparison of automated sepsis identification methods and electronic health record-based sepsis phenotyping: Improving case identification accuracy by accounting for confounding comorbid conditions. Crit Care Explor. 2019; 1:e0053
Quan H, Sundararajan V, Halfon P, et al. Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data. Med Care. 2005; 43:1130–1139
Moore BJ, White S, Washington R, et al. Identifying increased risk of readmission and in-hospital mortality using hospital administrative data: The AHRQ elixhauser comorbidity index. Med Care. 2017; 55:698–705
Buchman TG, Simpson SQ, Sciarretta KL, et al. Sepsis among Medicare beneficiaries: 1. The burdens of sepsis, 2012-2018. Crit Care Med. 2020; 48:276–288
Albritton N, Raveendran R, Jackson C. SEP-1 early management bundle, severe sepsis/septic shock: V5.4 measure updates. Questions and answers transcript. 2018, Washington, DC: Joint Commission
Bauer SR, Gonet JA, Rosario RF, et al. Inter-rater agreement for abstraction of the early management bundle, severe sepsis/septic shock (SEP-1) quality measure in a multi-hospital health system. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2019; 45:108–111
Rhee C, Filbin MR, Massaro AF, et al. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Prevention Epicenters ProgramCompliance with the national SEP-1 quality measure and association with sepsis outcomes: A multicenter retrospective cohort study. Crit Care Med. 2018; 46:1585–1591
Pepper DJ, Sun J, Cui X, et al. Antibiotic- and fluid-focused bundles potentially improve sepsis management, but high-quality evidence is lacking for the specificity required in the centers for Medicare and Medicaid service’s sepsis bundle (SEP-1). Crit Care Med. 2019; 47:1290–1300
Mackay F, Roy A, Schorr C, et al. 1471: CMS SEP-1 measure start time: Do we agree? A comparison of clinicians versus quality staff. Crit Care Med. 2018; 46:719

Auteurs

Sean C Yu (SC)

Institute for Informatics, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO.
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO.

Kevin D Betthauser (KD)

Department of Pharmacy, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis, MO.

Aditi Gupta (A)

Institute for Informatics, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO.

Patrick G Lyons (PG)

Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO.
Healthcare Innovation Lab, BJC HealthCare and Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO.

Albert M Lai (AM)

Institute for Informatics, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO.

Marin H Kollef (MH)

Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO.

Philip R O Payne (PRO)

Institute for Informatics, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO.

Andrew P Michelson (AP)

Institute for Informatics, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO.
Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH