Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33755106›Full record

ArticleFamily practice2021

Use of sepsis-related diagnostic criteria in primary care: a survey among general practitioners.

Merijn C F Mulders, Feike J Loots, Joey van Nieuwenhoven, Jan C Ter Maaten, Hjalmar R Bouma

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Family practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Be-SNAP: the Belgian Sepsis National Action Plan.Frontiers in public health · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Merijn C F MuldersDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4590-5925
Feike J LootsJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Joey van NieuwenhovenHet College, Weert, The Netherlands.
Jan C Ter MaatenDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Hjalmar R BoumaDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Groningen · NLUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUse of sepsis-criteria in hospital settings is effective in realizing early recognition, adequate treatment and reduction of sepsis-associated morbidity and mortality. Whether general practitioners (GPs) use these diagnostic criteria is unknown.

objectiveTo gauge the knowledge and use of various diagnostic criteria. To determine which parameters GPs associate with an increased likelihood of sepsis.

methodsTwo thousand five hundred and sixty GPs were invited and 229 agreed to participate in a survey, reached out to through e-mail and WhatsApp groups. The survey consisted of two parts: the first part aimed to obtain information about the GP, training and knowledge about sepsis recognition, and the second part tested specific knowledge using six realistic cases.

resultsTwo hundred and six questionnaires, representing a response rate of 8.1%, were eligible for analysis. Gut feeling (98.1%) was the most used diagnostic method, while systemic inflammatory response syndrome (37.9%), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) (7.8%) and UK Sepsis Trust criteria (UKSTc) (1.5%) were used by the minority of the GPs. Few of the responding GPs had heard of either the qSOFA (27.7%) or the UKSTc (11.7%). Recognition of sepsis varied greatly between GPs. GPs most strongly associated the individual signs of the qSOFA (mental status, systolic blood pressure, capillary refill time and respiratory rate) with diagnosing sepsis in the test cases.

conclusionsGPs mostly use gut feeling to diagnose sepsis and are frequently not familiar with the 'sepsis-criteria' used in hospital settings, although clinical reasoning was mostly in line with the qSOFA score. In order to improve sepsis recognition in primary care, GPs should be educated in the use of available screening tools.

Indexed as

General PractitionersSepsisEmergency Service, HospitalHospital MortalityHumansPrimary Health CarePrognosisRetrospective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesEarly warning scoregeneral practitionersinfectious disease medicineorgan dysfunction scoresprimary health caresepsis

Identifiers

PMID33755106
PMCPMC8527837
OpenAlexW3139432086

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.