ArticleChest2024
Sepsis Order Set Use Associated With Increased Care Value.
Article in Chest, 2024. 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.
- Lactate-Modified Prognostic Nutritional Index (LPNI) and Its Association with ICU Mortality in Patients with Sepsis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Article
- Decreased racial disparities in sepsis mortality after an order set-driven initiative: An analysis of 8151 patients.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSepsis is common and expensive, and evidence suggests that sepsis order sets may help to improve care. Very incomplete evidence exists regarding the effects of sepsis order sets on the value of care produced by hospitals or the societal costs of sepsis care. RESEARCH QUESTION: In patients hospitalized for sepsis, is the receipt a of a sepsis order set vs no order set associated with improved value of care, defined as decreased hospital mortality, decreased hospital direct variable costs, and decreased societal spending on hospitalizations? STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included patients discharged with sepsis International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, codes over 2 years from a large integrated delivery system. Using a propensity score, sepsis order set users were matched to nonusers to study the association between sepsis order set use and the value of care from the hospital and societal perspective. The association between order set receipt and hospital mortality, direct variable cost, and hospital revenue also were examined in a priori defined subgroups of sepsis severity and hospital mortality.
resultsThe study included 97,249 patients, with 52,793 patients (54%) receiving the sepsis order set. The propensity score match analysis included 55,542 patients, with 27,771 patients in each group. Recipients of the sepsis order set showed a 3.3% lower hospital mortality rate and a $1,487 lower median direct variable total cost (P < .01 for both). Median payer-neutral reimbursement (ie, PNR), a proxy for hospital revenue and thus societal costs, was $465 lower for sepsis order set users (P < .01). Receipt of the sepsis order set was associated with a $1,022 increase in contribution margin, the difference between direct variable costs and PNR per patient.
interpretationReceipt of the sepsis order set was associated with improved value of care, from both a hospital and societal perspective.
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.