ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2022
Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Management and Outcomes in Patients with Septic Shock in the Emergency Department.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- Temporal trends in hospital technical quality under unified clinical governance: a nationwide multicenter longitudinal study in Brazil.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Adherence to Pediatric Asthma Guidelines in Children with Asthma Exacerbation at the Emergency Department.Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the impact of modifications in emergency department (ED) practices caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the clinical outcomes and management of patients with septic shock. We performed a retrospective study. Patients with septic shock who presented to the ED between 1 January 2018 and 19 January 2020 were allocated to the pre-COVID-19 group, whereas those who presented between 20 January 2020 and 31 December 2020 were assigned to the post-COVID-19 group. We used propensity score matching to compare the sepsis-related interventions and clinical outcomes. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. Of the 3697 patients included, 2254 were classified as pre-COVID-19 and 1143 as post-COVID-19. A total of 1140 propensity score-matched pairings were created. Overall, the in-hospital mortality rate was 25.5%, with no statistical difference between the pre- and post-COVID-19 groups (p = 0.92). In a matched cohort, the post-COVID-19 group had delayed lactate measurement, blood culture test, and infection source control (all p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in time to antibiotics (p = 0.19) or vasopressor administration (p = 0.09) between the groups. Although sepsis-related interventions were delayed during the COVID-19 pandemic, there was no significant difference in the in-hospital mortality between the pre- and post-COVID-19 groups.
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.