ArticleThe American journal of emergency medicine2025
Risk factors associated with return sepsis admission following emergency department discharge with infection.
Article in The American journal of emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDespite sepsis having growing awareness nationally, efforts to reduce the public health impact of sepsis have lagged. Although there are known pathophysiologic mechanisms and preventive strategies, sepsis is rarely approached as a predictable or preventable condition. Predicting who will develop sepsis in patients with infection still remains a challenge. This study examined modifiable and nonmodifiable risk factors associated with patients initially discharged home with an infection and had future sepsis-related admissions within 7 days of the index Emergency Department (ED) visit.
methodsWe conducted a multi-center retrospective cohort analysis of adults presenting to two university hospital EDs. The inclusion criteria encompassed adult patients who were discharged from the ED at their index visit with discharge diagnosis (ICD 10-CM code) of pneumonia, urinary tract infection (UTI), and/or cellulitis and who returned for hospital admission within 7 days of the index visit due to sepsis, severe sepsis without septic shock, and/or septic shock. Using multivariate regression, risk factors that predict return sepsis admission within 7 days of ED index visit were evaluated, and a 7-day return sepsis admission model was constructed. The predictive power of the model was measured by c-statistic.
resultsAmong 10,179 unique ED patients, return sepsis admissions within 7 days occurred in 113 visits (1.11 % of discharged patients). Statistically significant risk factors among patients with infection associated with subsequent sepsis admission in the chosen model were Cardiovascular Disease (OR 2.07 95 % CI 1.26-3.42), Hypertension (OR 2.21 95 % CI 1.37-3.56), Chronic Kidney Disease (OR 1.80 95 % CI 1.11-2.91), Cancer (OR 2.22 95 % CI 1.43-3.45), Male (OR 1.67 95 % CI 1.13-2.45), arriving in an ambulance (vs. walk in OR 2.55 95 % CI 1.46-4.44), higher heart rate (OR 1.29 95 % CI 1.16-1.45), and higher temperature (OR 1.23 95 % CI 1.05-1.45), Hyperlipidemia was protective (OR 0.56 95 %CI 0.34-0.91). The c-statistic of our chosen model was 0.77 (95 % CI 0.73-0.81). The Hosmer-Lemeshow test for our logistic regression model resulted in a chi-square value of 7.23 with 8 degrees of freedom with a p-value of 0.51. This suggests that our model fits the data well.
conclusionOur findings may be used to risk stratify and guide outpatient disposition decisions for ED patients with infection and to determine which patients need to be more closely monitored in the outpatient setting following ED discharge.
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.