ArticleMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2018
Differences in Hypotensive vs. Non-Hypotensive Sepsis Management in the Emergency Department: Door-to-Antibiotic Time Impact on Sepsis Survival.
Article in Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sepsis Alerts in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review of Accuracy and Quality Measure Impact.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSepsis diagnosis can be incorrectly associated with the presence of hypotension during an infection, so the detection and management of non-hypotensive sepsis can be delayed. We aimed to evaluate how the presence or absence of hypotension, on admission at the emergency department, affects the initial management and outcomes of patients with community-onset severe sepsis.
methodsDemographic, clinical, laboratory, process of care, and outcome variables were recorded for all patients, at the emergency department of our university hospital, who presented with community-onset severe sepsis, between 1 March and 31 August in three consecutive years. Patient management consisted of standardized bundled care with five measures: Detection, blood cultures and empirical antibiotics, oxygen supplementation and fluid resuscitation (if needed), clinical monitoring, and noradrenalin administration (if needed). We compared all variables between patients who had hypotension (mean arterial pressure <65 mmHg), on admission to the emergency department, and those who did not.
resultsWe identified 153 episodes (84 (54.5%) men; mean age 73.6 ± 1.2; mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score 4.9 ± 2.7, and 41.2% hospital mortality). Hypotension was present on admission to the emergency department in 57 patients (37.2%). Hemodynamic treatment was applied earlier in patients who presented hypotension initially. Antibiotics were administered 48 min later in non-hypotensive sepsis (
conclusionsInitial management of patients with community-onset severe sepsis differed according to their clinical presentation. Initial hypotension was associated with early hemodynamic management and less ICU requirement. A non-significant delay was observed in the administration of antibiotics to initially non-hypotensive patients. The time of door-to-antibiotic administration was related to mortality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.