Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of implementing a sepsis screening (SS) tool based on the quick Sequential [Sepsis-Related] Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and the presence of confirmed/suspected infection. The implementation of the 6-h bundle was also evaluated. Interrupted times series with prospective data collection. Five hospital wards in a developing nation, Argentina. A total of 1151 patients (≥18years) recruited within 24-48h of hospital admission. The qSOFA-based SS tool and the 6-h bundle. The primary outcome was the timing of implementation of the first 6-h bundle element. Secondary outcomes were related to the adherence to the screening procedures. Of 1151 patients, 145 (12.6%) met the qSOFA-based SS tool criteria, among them intervention (39/64) patients received the first 6-h bundle element earlier (median 8h; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.1-16) than baseline (48/81) patients (median 22h; 95% CI: 3-41); these times, however, did not differ significantly (P=0.525). Overall, 47 (4.1%) patients had sepsis; intervention patients (18/25) received the first 6-h bundle element sooner (median 5h; 95% CI: 4-6) than baseline patients (15/22) did (median 12h; 95% CI: 0-33); however, times were not significantly different (P=0.470). While intervention patients were screened regularly, only one-third of patients who required sepsis alerts had them activated. The implementation of the qSOFA-based SS tool resulted in early, but not significantly improved, provision of 6-h bundle care. Screening procedures were regularly conducted, but sepsis alerts rarely activated. Further research is needed to better understand the implementation of sepsis care in developing settings.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call