Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37286298›Full record

ArticleBMJ open quality2023

Survey of adherence to sepsis care bundles in six European countries shows low adherence and possible patient risk.

Ron Daniels, Ellie Foot, Sophie Pittaway, Serena Urzi, Arnaud Favry, Mark Miller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

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

6 authors.

Ron DanielsUK Sepsis Trust, London, UK.
Ellie FootIpsos, London, UK ellie.foot@ipsos.com.
Sophie PittawayIpsos, London, UK.
Serena UrziIpsos, London, UK.
Arnaud FavrybioMérieux, Lyon, France.
Mark MillerbioMérieux, Lyon, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Patient Care BundlesSepsisCross-Sectional StudiesEvidence-Based PracticeHumansPatientsHealthcare quality improvementPatient Care BundlesSepsis

Identifiers

PMID37286298
PMCPMC10254959

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.