ArticleJournal of hospital medicine2025
Characteristics, clinical care, and outcomes of sepsis among patients boarding in the emergency department.
Article in Journal of hospital medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Correlation analysis of serum FGF9, Sestrin2 and HBDH with the severity of sepsis.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2026Article
- The potential for patient-reported data and narratives to improve quality during emergency department boarding.Health affairs scholar · 2025Article
- Characteristics, clinical care, and outcomes of sepsis among patients boarding in the emergency department.Journal of hospital 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients who first meet clinical criteria for sepsis while boarding in the emergency department (ED) may not receive optimal sepsis care.
objectiveAssess the association between ED boarding status and sepsis quality of care and outcomes.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to a large academic hospital from July 2021 to October 2023 who had clinical features consistent with sepsis present while physically in the ED. We compared outcomes for patients who experienced time zero (T-0; the time clinical features of sepsis were first present) while boarding in the ED (physically in the ED but admitted to a different service) to those experiencing T-0 while still under the care of the ED provider team. We used logistic regression to estimate the association between ED boarding status at T-0 and compliance with the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock: Management Bundle (SEP-1) core measure, individual bundle element compliance, and hospital mortality adjusting for prespecified covariates. In a subgroup analysis among patients who had not already received antibiotics before T-0, we conducted a Cox proportional hazards model to estimate the association between boarding status on time-to-antibiotics.
resultsAmong 4795 patients meeting a clinical definition of sepsis in the ED, 422 (8.8%) experienced T-0 as ED boarders. These patients were similar in age, sex, and comorbidities compared with patients experiencing T-0 while still under ED care. Fewer patients with T-0 as an ED boarder received SEP-1 compliant care (25% vs. 38%, p < .001), including a lower proportion of fluid resuscitation (15% vs. 26%, p = .004) and lactate assessment (62% vs. 94%, p < .001). Overall, more patients in the ED boarder group received antibiotics within 3 hours, but one-third of patients had already received antibiotics prior to T-0. Among patients who had not already received antibiotics prior to T-0, experiencing T-0 as an ED boarder was associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving antibiotics (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.67 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.84]) and longer time to antibiotics from T-0 (142 min vs. 100 min, p = .007).
conclusionsSepsis patients experiencing T-0 as a boarder in the ED have a lower likelihood of receiving SEP-1 compliant care compared to patients who experience T-0 while still under ED care.
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.