ArticleCureus2021
Use of a Clinical Audit System in Implementing Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines in Patients With Peritonitis.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Sepsis is the predominant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with peritonitis. "Surviving Sepsis Campaign" (SSC) is an international effort in reducing mortality based on evidence-based guidelines. This study aims to assess the impact of audit-based feedback in a Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) format on improving the implementation of the SSC guidelines in patients with generalized peritonitis at our center. Methods This prospective observational study was conducted in four audit cycles in PDSA format. Multi-departmental inputs were taken to suggest modifications in practice. A questionnaire-based analysis of reasons for non-compliance was performed to find out the opinions and reasons for non-compliance. Morbidity, mortality, and the length of ICU and hospital stay among these patients were also analyzed. Results Baseline compliance with intravenous (IV) bolus administration, central venous pressure (CVP)-guided fluids, and inotropes support when indicated were 100%. Over the course of the three audit cycles, statistically significant improvement in compliance was noted for obtaining blood cultures before antibiotics, antibiotic administration within three hours of presentation, and serum lactate measurement. Overall bundle compliance improved from 9.2% to 64.7% by the end of audit cycle III. Conclusions This study demonstrates that audit-based feedback is a dependable means of improving compliance with SSC guidelines. It brings about improvement by educating users, modifying their behavior through feedback, and enhances process improvement by identifying and correcting systemic deficiencies in the organization.
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.