Nyt fra tidsskrifterne
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=sirs&setpoint=90069#99955
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=sirs&setpoint=90069#99659
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=sirs&setpoint=90069#98819
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=sirs&setpoint=90069#95183
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=sirs&setpoint=90069#94689
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=sirs&setpoint=90069#94683
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=sirs&setpoint=90069#92646
Klik på knappen for at kopiere eller tryk på linket nedenfor.
Kopieret til udklipsholder!
https://infmed.dk/nyheder-udefra?rss_filter=sirs&setpoint=90069#91271
Søgeord (sirs) valgt.
8 emner vises.
Infection, 26.02.2024
Tilføjet 26.02.2024
Abstract Purpose Sepsis suspicion by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is associated with improved patient outcomes. This study assessed sepsis incidence and recognition by EMS and analyzed which of the screening tools recommended by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign best facilitates sepsis prediction. Methods Retrospective cohort study of claims data from health insurances (n = 221,429 EMS cases), and paramedics’ and emergency physicians’ EMS documentation (n = 110,419); analyzed outcomes were: sepsis incidence and case fatality compared to stroke and myocardial infarction, the extent of documentation for screening-relevant variables and sepsis suspicion, tools’ intersections for screening positive in identical EMS cases and their predictive ability for an inpatient sepsis diagnosis. Results Incidence of sepsis (1.6%) was similar to myocardial infarction (2.6%) and stroke (2.7%); however, 30-day case fatality rate was almost threefold higher (31.7% vs. 13.4%; 11.8%). Complete vital sign documentation was achieved in 8.2% of all cases. Paramedics never, emergency physicians rarely (0.1%) documented a sepsis suspicion, respectively septic shock. NEWS2 had the highest sensitivity (73.1%; Specificity:81.6%) compared to qSOFA (23.1%; Sp:96.6%), SIRS (28.2%; Sp:94.3%) and MEWS (48.7%; Sp:88.1%). Depending on the tool, 3.7% to 19.4% of all cases screened positive; only 0.8% in all tools simultaneously. Conclusion Incidence and mortality underline the need for better sepsis awareness, documentation of vital signs and use of screening tools. Guidelines may omit MEWS and SIRS as recommendations for prehospital providers since they were inferior in all accuracy measures. Though no tool performed ideally, NEWS2 qualifies as the best tool to predict the highest proportion of septic patients and to rule out cases that are likely non-septic.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedInfection, 20.02.2024
Tilføjet 20.02.2024
Abstract Purpose Sepsis suspicion by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is associated with improved patient outcomes. This study assessed sepsis incidence and recognition by EMS and analyzed which of the screening tools recommended by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign best facilitates sepsis prediction. Methods Retrospective cohort study of claims data from health insurances (n = 221,429 EMS cases), and paramedics’ and emergency physicians’ EMS documentation (n = 110,419); analyzed outcomes were: sepsis incidence and case fatality compared to stroke and myocardial infarction, the extent of documentation for screening-relevant variables and sepsis suspicion, tools’ intersections for screening positive in identical EMS cases and their predictive ability for an inpatient sepsis diagnosis. Results Incidence of sepsis (1.6%) was similar to myocardial infarction (2.6%) and stroke (2.7%); however, 30-day case fatality rate was almost threefold higher (31.7% vs. 13.4%; 11.8%). Complete vital sign documentation was achieved in 8.2% of all cases. Paramedics never, emergency physicians rarely (0.1%) documented a sepsis suspicion, respectively septic shock. NEWS2 had the highest sensitivity (73.1%; Specificity:81.6%) compared to qSOFA (23.1%; Sp:96.6%), SIRS (28.2%; Sp:94.3%) and MEWS (48.7%; Sp:88.1%). Depending on the tool, 3.7% to 19.4% of all cases screened positive; only 0.8% in all tools simultaneously. Conclusion Incidence and mortality underline the need for better sepsis awareness, documentation of vital signs and use of screening tools. Guidelines may omit MEWS and SIRS as recommendations for prehospital providers since they were inferior in all accuracy measures. Though no tool performed ideally, NEWS2 qualifies as the best tool to predict the highest proportion of septic patients and to rule out cases that are likely non-septic.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedBMC Infectious Diseases, 31.01.2024
Tilføjet 31.01.2024
Abstract Background Severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome (SFTS) is an emerging zoonosis with a high fatality rate in China. Previous studies have reported that dysregulated inflammatory response is associated with disease pathogenesis and mortality in patients with SFTS. This investigation aimed to evaluate the prevalence and characteristics of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), and its impact on prognosis. Methods Data on demographic characteristics, comorbid conditions, clinical manifestations, laboratory parameters, and survival time of patients with SFTS were collected. Patients were divided into the non-SIRS and SIRS groups according to the presence of SIRS, then their clinical data were compared. Results A total of 290 patients diagnosed with SFTS were retrospectively enrolled, including 126(43.4%) patients with SIRS. Patients in the non-survivor group had more prevalence of SIRS than patients in the survivor group (P
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedClinical Infectious Diseases, 28.10.2023
Tilføjet 28.10.2023
AbstractBackgroundIdentification of bloodstream infection (BSI) in transplant recipients may be difficult due to immunosuppression. Accordingly, we aimed to compare responses to BSI in critically ill transplant and non-transplant recipients and to modify systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria for transplant recipients.MethodsWe analyzed univariate risks and developed multivariable models of BSI with 27 clinical variables from adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients at the University of Virginia (UVA) and at the University of Pittsburgh (Pitt). We used Bayesian inference to adjust SIRS criteria for transplant recipients.ResultsWe analyzed 38.7 million hourly measurements from 41,725 patients at UVA, including 1,897 transplant recipients with 193 episodes of BSI, and 53,608 patients at Pitt, including 1,614 transplant recipients with 768 episodes of BSI. The univariate responses to BSI were comparable in transplant and non-transplant recipients. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80-0.83) for the model using all UVA patient data and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.76-0.83) when using only transplant recipient data. The UVA all-patient model had an AUC of 0.77 (95%CI, 0.76-0.79) in non-transplant recipients and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.71-0.79) in transplant recipients at Pitt. The relative importance of the 27 predictors was similar in transplant and non-transplant models. An upper temperature of 37.5°C in SIRS criteria improved reclassification performance in transplant recipients.ConclusionCritically ill transplant and non-transplant recipients had similar responses to BSI. An upper temperature of 37.5°C in SIRS criteria improved BSI screening in transplant recipients.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedClinical Infectious Diseases, 15.10.2023
Tilføjet 15.10.2023
AbstractThe Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced the Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) as a pay-for-reporting measure in 2015 and is now planning to make it a pay-for-performance measure by incorporating it into the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program. This joint IDSA/ACEP/PIDS/SHEA/SHM/SIPD position paper highlights concerns with this change. Multiple studies indicate that SEP-1 implementation was associated with increased broad-spectrum antibiotic use, lactate measurements, and aggressive fluid resuscitation for patients with suspected sepsis but not with decreased mortality rates. Increased focus on SEP-1 risks further diverting attention and resources from more effective measures and comprehensive sepsis care. We recommend retiring SEP-1 rather than using it in a payment model and shifting instead to new sepsis metrics that focus on patient outcomes. CMS is developing a community-onset sepsis 30-day mortality electronic clinical quality measure (eCQM) that is an important step in this direction. The eCQM preliminarily identifies sepsis using systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, antibiotic administrations or diagnosis codes for infection or sepsis, and clinical indicators of acute organ dysfunction. We support the eCQM but recommend removing SIRS criteria and diagnosis codes to streamline implementation, decrease variability between hospitals, maintain vigilance for patients with sepsis but without SIRS, and avoid promoting antibiotic use in uninfected patients with SIRS. We further advocate for CMS to harmonize the eCQM with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Adult Sepsis Event surveillance metric to promote unity in federal measures, decrease reporting burden for hospitals, and facilitate shared prevention initiatives. These steps will result in a more robust measure that will encourage hospitals to pay more attention to the full breadth of sepsis care, stimulate new innovations in diagnosis and treatment, and ultimately bring us closer to our shared goal of improving outcomes for patients.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedInfectious Disease Modelling, 14.10.2023
Tilføjet 14.10.2023
Publication date: Available online 14 October 2023 Source: Infectious Disease Modelling Author(s): Punya Alahakoon, James M. McCaw, Peter G. Taylor
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedSchertz, Adam R.; Eisner, Ashley E.; Smith, Sydney A.; Lenoir, Kristin M.; Thomas, Karl W.
Critical Care Explorations, 24.08.2023
Tilføjet 24.08.2023
OBJECTIVES: Clinical sepsis phenotypes may be defined by a wide range of characteristics such as site of infection, organ dysfunction patterns, laboratory values, and demographics. There is a paucity of literature regarding the impact of site of infection on the timing and pattern of clinical sepsis markers. This study hypothesizes that important phenotypic variation in clinical markers and outcomes of sepsis exists when stratified by infection site. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Five hospitals within the Wake Forest Health System from June 2019 to December 2019. PATIENTS: Six thousand seven hundred fifty-three hospitalized adults with a discharge International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision code for acute infection who met systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), or Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) criteria during the index hospitalization. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome of interest was a composite of 30-day mortality or shock. Infection site was determined by a two-reviewer process. Significant demographic, vital sign, and laboratory result differences were seen across all infection sites. For the composite outcome of shock or 30-day mortality, unknown or unspecified infections had the highest proportion (21.34%) and CNS infections had the lowest proportion (8.11%). Respiratory, vascular, and unknown or unspecified infection sites showed a significantly increased adjusted and unadjusted odds of the composite outcome as compared with the other infection sites except CNS. Hospital time prior to SIRS positivity was shortest in unknown or unspecified infections at a median of 0.88 hours (interquartile range [IQR], 0.22–5.05 hr), and hospital time prior to qSOFA and SOFA positivity was shortest in respiratory infections at a median of 54.83 hours (IQR, 9.55–104.67 hr) and 1.88 hours (IQR, 0.47–17.40 hr), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Phenotypic variation in illness severity and mortality exists when stratified by infection site. There is a significantly higher adjusted and unadjusted odds of the composite outcome of 30-day mortality or shock in respiratory, vascular, and unknown or unspecified infections as compared with other sites.
Læs mere Tjek på PubMedInfectious Disease Modelling, 18.07.2023
Tilføjet 18.07.2023
Publication date: Available online 17 July 2023 Source: Infectious Disease Modelling Author(s): Jianpeng Wang, Zhidong Teng, Binxiang Dai
Læs mere Tjek på PubMed