Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41235288›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Evaluating Compliance and Impact of the Sepsis Six Bundle in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Jixon Thomas, Parnika P Cherukupalli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Jixon ThomasEmergency Medicine, Kottekad Catholic Dharmodaya Sangham Hospital, Thrissur, IND.
Parnika P CherukupalliInternal Medicine, SRM Institutes for Medical Science (SIMS) Hospital, Chennai, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objectives Sepsis resuscitation bundles are the subject of numerous quality improvement initiatives that have recently been implemented globally. These educational initiatives have been shown to be associated with improvements in clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the compliance and impact of the Sepsis Six bundle in the emergency department (ED). Methodology A cohort study was conducted among 660 patients who had been diagnosed with sepsis in the ED of a tertiary care center. Results The mean age of study participants was 44.8±11.7 years. Of the total, 37% of the patients were female and 63% were male. Among the study participants, 286 (43.3%) patients had the presence of shock; 220 (33.3%) had the presence of sepsis at the time of admission, and 440 (66.7%) had the presence of sepsis after 24 hours of admission. The primary site of infection in the majority of study participants was the lung, followed by the brain, haematological origin, and the kidney. A mortality rate of 32% was noted. Conclusion Targeted quality improvement measures, staff training, and streamlined ED workflows are warranted to enhance adherence to the Sepsis Six bundle and ultimately improve survival rates in septic patients.

Indexed as

emergency medicinemorbiditymortalitysepsissepsis six bundle

Identifiers

PMID41235288
PMCPMC12611334

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.