ReviewBMC health services research2025
Barriers and facilitators to optimal sepsis care - a systematized review of healthcare professionals' perspectives.
Review in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthcare pathways and outpatient management prior to community-acquired sepsis hospitalization in Germany, 2016-2019.Infection · 2026Article
- Strategies to address implementation barriers in sepsis survivors' care transitions to home health and outpatient care: a multi-site, type 1 hybrid implementation study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Clinician perspectives on blood culture practice and diagnostic stewardship in regional emergency departments.Journal of medical microbiology · 2026Article
- Development Process of a Clinical Decision Support System for Empiric Antibiotic Therapies in Patients With Sepsis: Case Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Piloting an ICU follow-up clinic - qualitative process evaluation alongside a feasibility study.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Article
- The next frontier in sepsis: connected ICU data for real-world clinical decision making.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- Context and determinants for implementing a sepsis survivor care transition intervention reported from five health systems and home health agencies.Frontiers in 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite therapeutic advances, sepsis remains a global burden. Shortcomings within the healthcare system that inflate morbidity and mortality rates are instructive in this regard. This review aims to provide a qualitative synthesis of literature related to healthcare providers' perspectives on sepsis care, emphasizing perceived factors that impact the adequate care of septic patients and sepsis survivors.
methodsIn February 2023, we conducted a systematized search approach using the PubMed database.
resultsOf 114 articles found in the PubMed database, 37 were included. A further 13 articles were identified by manual search. Healthcare providers highlighted a variety of dysfunctional and functional processes with an impact on sepsis care. Six domains were identified, related to the underlying disease, the patient, the provider, the guidelines, the healthcare system, and the collaboration among providers. Of note, providers' level of knowledge and a lack of communication between disciplines and/or sectors were reported as shortcomings in each phase of the care pathway (prevention, recognition, treatment, transitions of care, and aftercare).
conclusionsThis review suggests that, without limitation, interventions that provide continuous provider education as well as standard communication channels between interdisciplinary and intersectoral providers have great potential to improve structural deficiencies in sepsis 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.