Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28499459›Full record

Observational studyScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2017

Dispatch and prehospital transport for acute septic patients: an observational study.

Peter Bank Pedersen, Daniel Pilsgaard Henriksen, Søren Mikkelsen, Annmarie Touborg Lassen

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Prehospital fluid therapy in patients with suspected infection: a survey of ambulance personnel's practice.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. [Consensus document for sepsis code implementation and development in the Community of Madrid].Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2019
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Peter Bank PedersenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark & Odense University Hospital, Odense, C DK-5000, Denmark. peter.bank.pedersen@rsyd.dk.
Daniel Pilsgaard HenriksenDepartment of Emergency Medicine & Department of Respiratory Medicine, Odense University Hospital, Odense, C DK-5000, Denmark.
Søren MikkelsenDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Odense University Hospital, Odense, C DK-5000, Denmark.
Annmarie Touborg LassenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark & Odense University Hospital, Odense, C DK-5000, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn order to dispatch ambulances with the correct level of urgency, the dispatch center has to balance the perceived urgency and traffic safety considerations with the available resources. As urgency is not clear in all clinical situations, some high urgency patients may end up with a suboptimal mode of transport. Patients with severe sepsis or septic shock suffer from highly time dependent conditions but they present with a wide range of symptoms, which might be difficult to identify in the dispatch system. The aim of the study is to investigate the modes of prehospital transport among acute admitted patients with sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock.

methodsWe included all adult patients (≥15 years) presenting to an acute medical unit at Odense University Hospital with a first-time admission of community-acquired sepsis between September 2010-August 2011. Cases and prehospital ambulance transport were identified by structured manual chart review. In all cases it was registered, whether the ordinary ambulance was assisted by the mobile emergency care unit (MECU), manned by anesthesiologists.

resultsWe included 1,713 patients median age 72 years (IQR 57-81), 793 (46.3%) male, 621 (36.3%) had sepsis, 1,071 (62.5%) severe sepsis, and 21 (1.2%) septic shock. In the group of sepsis patients, 390 (62.8%) arrived without public prehospital transport, 197 (31.7%) were transported by ambulance, and 34 (5.5%) were assisted by MECU. In the group of severe sepsis patients, the same percentage 62.8% arrived without public pre-hospital transport, a lower percentage 28.2% were transported by ambulance, and a larger percentage 9.0% were transported by MECU. Among 21 patients with septic shock, 10 arrived without public pre-hospital transport (47.7%), 7 (33.3%) were transported by ambulance, and 4 (19.0%) by MECU. The 30-day mortality hazard ratio was associated with mode of transport, with the adjusted highest hazard ratio found in the group of MECU transported patients 1.76 (95%Cl 1.16-2.66).

conclusionsA substantial proportion of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock arrive to hospital without public prehospital transport or by unspecialized ambulances.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAmbulancesEmergency Medical DispatchEmergency Medical ServicesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSepsisSeverity of Illness IndexShock, SepticTransportation of PatientsAcute medicineDispatchEmergency medicinePrehospital transportSepsisSeptic shock

Identifiers

PMID28499459
PMCPMC5429534

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.