Background: Differences between hospital-presenting sepsis (HPS) and emergency department-presenting sepsis (EDPS) are not well described.
Objectives: We aimed to (1) quantify the prevalence of HPS versus EDPS cases and outcomes; (2) compare HPS versus EDPS characteristics at presentation; (3) compare HPS versus EDPS in process and patient outcomes; and (4) estimate risk differences in patient outcomes attributable to initial resuscitation disparities.
Design: Retrospective consecutive-sample cohort.
Objectives: The prevalence of responsiveness to initial fluid challenge among hypotensive sepsis patients is unclear. To avoid fluid overload, and unnecessary treatment, it is important to differentiate these phenotypes. We aimed to 1) determine the proportion of hypotensive sepsis patients sustaining favorable hemodynamic response after initial fluid challenge, 2) determine demographic and clinical risk factors that predicted refractory hypotension, and 3) assess the association between timeliness of fluid resuscitation and refractoriness.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFObjectives: The objectives of this study were to 1) assess patterns of early crystalloid resuscitation provided to sepsis and septic shock patients at initial presentation and 2) determine the association between time to initial crystalloid resuscitation with hospital mortality, mechanical ventilation, ICU utilization, and length of stay.
Design: Consecutive-sample observational cohort.
Setting: Nine tertiary and community hospitals over 1.
Objectives: To determine mortality and costs associated with adherence to an aggressive, 3-hour sepsis bundle versus noncompliance with greater than or equal to one bundle element for severe sepsis and septic shock patients.
Design: Prospective, multisite, observational study following three sequential, independent cohorts, from a single U.S.