ArticleBMJ open quality2023
Survey of adherence to sepsis care bundles in six European countries shows low adherence and possible patient risk.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Regional Adherence to Early Sepsis Management Bundle and Associated Mortality in Hong Kong Between 2009-2018.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Sepsis in the emergency department: a dual challenge of early management and antimicrobial stewardship.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Integration of mind mapping and In-Situ Simulation training to enhance the implementation of sepsis Hour-1 Bundle treatment.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Be-SNAP: the Belgian Sepsis National Action Plan.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Influence of underlying condition and performance of sepsis bundle in very old patients with sepsis: a nationwide cohort study.Annals of intensive care · 2024Article
- The chain of survival and rehabilitation for sepsis: concepts and proposals for healthcare trajectory optimization.Annals of intensive care · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sepsis is a life-threatening condition which globally claims more lives than cancer. A set of evidence-based clinical practices (sepsis bundles) have been developed to guide early diagnosis and rapid intervention, which are vital to patient survival; however, their use is not widely adopted. A cross-sectional survey was administered in June-July 2022 to understand healthcare practitioner (HCP) knowledge of and adherence to sepsis bundles and identify key barriers to adherence in the UK, France, Spain, Sweden, Denmark and Norway; a total of n=368 HCPs ultimately participated. The results showed that among HCPs, overall awareness of sepsis and the importance of early diagnosis and treatment is high. However, there are indications that adherence to sepsis bundles is well below the standard of care: when asked which steps providers carry out to treat sepsis, only 44% report carrying out all steps in the bundle; and 66% of providers agreed that delays in sepsis diagnosis occur sometimes where they work. This survey also highlighted the possible barriers which are impeding the implementation of optimal sepsis care: particularly high patient caseload and staff shortages. This research highlights important gaps and obstacles in reaching optimal care of sepsis in the surveyed countries. There is a need for healthcare leaders and policy-makers alike to advocate for increased funding for more staff and training to address existing knowledge gaps and improve patient outcomes.
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.