Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41803377›Full record

ArticleCJEM2026

Improving early recognition and treatment of sepsis in paramedic services and emergency departments: a pan-Canadian mixed methods application of the Theoretical Domains Framework.

A J E Carter, B L Bigham, J Goldstein, J Greene, M Harrison, A Steenbeek, J Curran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CJEM, 2026. 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

7 authors.

A J E CarterEmergency Health Services, Halifax, NS, Canada. Alix.Carter@lhsc.on.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1542-1521
B L BighamScarborough Health Network Research Institute and Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
J GoldsteinEmergency Health Services, Halifax, NS, Canada.
J GreeneEmergency Health Services, Halifax, NS, Canada.
M HarrisonEmergency Health Services, Halifax, NS, Canada.
A SteenbeekEmergency Health Services, Halifax, NS, Canada.
J CurranEmergency Health Services, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesEfforts to implement evidence-based guidelines for sepsis care (Surviving Sepsis, CAEP guideline) have met with limited success and mortality from sepsis remains high. We sought to understand barriers and facilitators from the frontline perspective of emergency nurses, physicians, and paramedics.

methodsIn an explanatory sequential mixed methods approach, a 55-question survey was developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and scoping review (reported separately) and distributed via Canadian emergency, nurse, physician, and paramedic organizations in English and French. Purposeful recruiting of interviewees followed, using an interview guide informed by the scoping review and survey. Recordings were transcribed, and audit trails were maintained. A coding tree was developed and findings from the thematic analysis were mapped to TDF constructs, triangulating findings from all data sources.

resultsData consisted of 545 surveys from paramedics (37%), nurses (20%), and physicians (27%), spanning all provinces and the territories in Canada, and 15 interviews (4 nurses, 6 physicians, 5 paramedics).Six themes emerged: access block, recognition by the public, resources (human, physical), leveraging scopes of practice (paramedics, nurses), recognition by healthcare, and the importance of communication. Many of these map to the TDF domain of Environment, Context, and Resources. There was support for guidelines (88% physician/93% paramedic/89% nurse), but interprofessional differences include awareness/understanding the guidelines (92% physician/72% paramedic/84% nurse) and trust in the evidence behind the guidelines (70% physician/85% paramedic/94% nurse). Reinforcement strategies at the point of care were more highly supported (74%/76%/81%) than education (physician 59%, paramedic 85%, nurse 78%).

conclusionThe themes of this work confirm many of the issues known from previous publications, but also added key insights such as access block and recognition by the public. It also reinforces that raising awareness/more education is not a strong facilitator for physicians or nurses.The frontline perspective adds key insights that can improve sepsis care by overcoming key barriers and leveraging facilitators that have been highlighted as important in the complex healthcare implementation environment that is the ED.

Indexed as

Early DiagnosisEmergency Medical ServicesEmergency Service, HospitalSepsisCanadaFemaleHumansMaleParamedicsSurveys and QuestionnairesEmergency departmentEmergency medical servicesPrehospitalSepsis management

Identifiers

PMID41803377
PMCPMC13490200

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.