Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32690518›Full record

Observational studyBMJ open2020

How well are sepsis and a sense of urgency documented throughout the acute care chain in the Netherlands? A prospective, observational study.

Gideon Latten, Kirsten Hensgens, Eefje G P M de Bont, Jean W M Muris, Jochen W L Cals, Patricia Stassen

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ open, 2020. 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. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. 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

6 authors.

Gideon LattenEmergency Department, Zuyderland Medical Centre Heerlen, Heerlen, The Netherlands g.latten@zuyderland.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-4110-5242
Kirsten HensgensEmergency Department, Zuyderland Medical Centre Heerlen, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
Eefje G P M de BontFamily Medicine, Maastricht University, Research Institute CAPHRI, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands.
Jean W M MurisFamily Medicine, Maastricht University, Research Institute CAPHRI, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8780-476X
Jochen W L CalsFamily Medicine, Maastricht University, Research Institute CAPHRI, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands.
Patricia StassenInternal Medicine, MUMC, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0864-1542

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the documentation of sepsis and a sense of urgency throughout the acute care chain.

designProspective cohort study.

settingEmergency department (ED) in a large district hospital in Heerlen, The Netherlands.

participantsParticipants included patients ≥18 years with suspected sepsis who visited the ED during out-of-hours between September 2017 and January 2018 (n=339) and had been referred by a general practitioner and/or transported by ambulance. We defined suspected sepsis as suspected or proven infection and the presence of ≥2 quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment and/or ≥2 Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome criteria. OUTCOME MEASURES: We analysed how often sepsis and a sense of urgency were documented in the prehospital and ED medical records. A sense of urgency was considered documented when a medical record suggested the need of immediate assessment by a physician in the ED. We described documentation patterns throughout the acute care chain and investigated whether documentation of sepsis or a sense of urgency is associated with adverse outcomes (intensive care admission/30-day all-cause mortality).

resultsSepsis was documented in 16.8% of medical records and a sense of urgency in 22.4%. In 4.1% and 7.7%, respectively, sepsis and a sense of urgency were documented by all involved professionals. In patients with an adverse outcome, sepsis was documented more often in the ED than in patients without an adverse outcome (47.9% vs 13.7%, p<0.001).

conclusionsOur study shows that in prehospital and ED medical records, sepsis and a sense of urgency are documented in one out of five patients. In only 1 out of 20 patients sepsis or a sense of urgency is documented by all involved professionals. It is possible that poor documentation causes harm, due to delayed diagnosis or treatment. Hence, it could be important to raise awareness among professionals regarding the importance of their documentation.

Indexed as

SepsisAgedAged, 80 and overCritical CareEmergency Service, HospitalHospital MortalityHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsProspective Studiesaccident & emergency medicineadult intensive & critical careepidemiology

Identifiers

PMID32690518
PMCPMC7371221

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.