Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36789014›Full record

ArticleJournal of intensive medicine2022

Compliance with SEP-1 guidelines is associated with improved outcomes for septic shock but not for severe sepsis.

Shelly N B Sloan, Nate Rodriguez, Thomas Seward, Lucy Sare, Lukas Moore, Greg Stahl, Kerry Johnson, Scott Goade, Robert Arnce

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of intensive medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. SepsisJournal of medical microbiology · 2025
    Review
  9. Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients With Sepsis Before and After Implementation of a Sepsis Care Improvement Initiative at a Community Hospital.The Journal of pharmacy technology : jPT : official publication of the Association of Pharmacy Technicians · 2024
    Article
  10. State of the art of sepsis care for the emergency medicine clinician.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2024
    Review
  11. Impact of time to treatment in first occurrence, non-severeAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Risk for primary cephalosporin resistance in Gram-negative bacteremia.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2023
    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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Shelly N B SloanDepartment of Primary Care, College of Medicine, Kansas City University, 2901St. Johns Blvd., Joplin, MO 64804, USA.
Nate RodriguezDepartment of Primary Care, College of Medicine, Kansas City University, 2901St. Johns Blvd., Joplin, MO 64804, USA.
Thomas SewardDepartment of Primary Care, College of Medicine, Kansas City University, 2901St. Johns Blvd., Joplin, MO 64804, USA.
Lucy SareDepartment of Primary Care, College of Medicine, Kansas City University, 2901St. Johns Blvd., Joplin, MO 64804, USA.
Lukas MooreDepartment of Primary Care, College of Medicine, Kansas City University, 2901St. Johns Blvd., Joplin, MO 64804, USA.
Greg StahlDepartment of Quality Improvement, Freeman Health System, Joplin, MO 64804, USA.
Kerry JohnsonDepartment of Mathematics, Missouri Southern State University, Joplin, MO 64801, USA.
Scott GoadeDepartment of Pharmacy, Freeman Health System, Joplin, MO 64804, USA.
Robert ArnceDepartment of Primary Care, College of Medicine, Kansas City University, 2901St. Johns Blvd., Joplin, MO 64804, USA.
Kansas City University · USFreeman Health System · USMissouri Southern State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In 2018, the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) issued a protocol for the treatment of sepsis. This bundle protocol, titled SEP-1 is a multicomponent 3 h and 6 h resuscitation treatment for patients with the diagnosis of either severe sepsis or septic shock. The SEP-1 bundle includes antibiotic administration, fluid bolus, blood cultures, lactate measurement, vasopressors for fluid-refractory hypotension, and a reevaluation of volume status. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with either severe sepsis or septic shock comparing mortality outcomes based on compliance with the updated SEP-1 bundle at a rural community hospital. Methods: Mortality outcome and readmission data were extracted from an electronic medical records database from January 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020. International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes were used to identify patients with either severe sepsis or septic shock. Once identified, patients were separated into four populations: patients with severe sepsis who met SEP-1, patients with severe sepsis who failed SEP-1, patients with septic shock who met SEP-1, and patients with septic shock who failed SEP-1. A patient who met bundle criteria (SEP-1 criteria) received each component of the bundle in the time allotted. Using chi-squared test of homogeneity, mortality outcomes for population proportions were investigated. Two sample proportion summary hypothesis test and 95% confidence intervals (CI) determined significance in mortality outcomes. Results: Out of our 1122 patient population, 437 patients qualified to be measured by CMS criteria. Of the 437 patients, 195 met the treatment bundle and 242 failed the treatment bundle. Upon comparing the two groups, we found the probable difference in mortality rate between the met(14.87%) and failed bundle(27.69%) groups to be significant(95% CI: 5.28-20.34, Conclusion: This study shows that with septic shock obtained a benefit, decreased mortality, when the SEP-1 bundle was met. However, meeting the SEP-1 bundle had no benefit for patients who had the diagnosis of severe sepsis alone. The significant difference in mortality, found between the met and failed bundle groups, is primarily due to the number of patients with septic shock, and whether or not those patients with septic shock met or failed the bundle.

Indexed as

Centers for Medicaid and Medicare ServicesEarly goal-directed therapyQuality improvementReimbursementSEP-1Sepsis

Identifiers

PMID36789014
PMCPMC9924005
OpenAlexW4280628134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.