Observational studyScientific reports2026
Steroid administration, timing, and dose in patients with septic shock in the emergency department: retrospective analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort study.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The benefit and optimal timing of corticosteroids in septic shock remain debated. Most evidence comes from intensive care unit-based studies, although key treatment decisions are often made early in the emergency department (ED). This study evaluated the association between steroid administration, including hydrocortisone timing and dose, and mortality in patients with septic shock in the ED. This retrospective observational study used an ED-based prospective multicenter septic shock registry from the Korean Shock Society (KoSS). The association between steroid administration and 28-day mortality was evaluated in adult patients with septic shock using multivariable regression models. Among hydrocortisone-treated patients, the associations of time from first vasopressor initiation to first hydrocortisone administration, norepinephrine-equivalent dose, and hydrocortisone dose with mortality were analyzed. From 2015 to 2023, a total of 5,127 patients were included. After adjustment, steroid use was associated with lower 28-day mortality (steroid: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.752, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.637-0.887; hydrocortisone: aOR 0.745, 95% CI 0.627-0.884; both p = 0.001). Multivariable analyses after PSM, IPTW, multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, and multivariable time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models showed similar findings. This association remained in the vasopressin subgroup (aOR 0.631, 95% CI 0.494-0.805, p < 0.001) but not in patients who did not receive vasopressin (aOR 0.967, 95% CI 0.773-1.209, p = 0.769; interaction p = 0.025). Among 1,529 patients with septic shock who received hydrocortisone, a higher norepinephrine-equivalent dose at first steroid administration (aOR 2.014, 95% CI 1.302-3.114, p = 0.002) and a longer interval from first vasopressor initiation to first steroid administration (aOR 1.018, 95% CI 1.003-1.033, p = 0.017) were associated with increased mortality, as was hydrocortisone dosing > 300 mg/day (aOR 1.577, 95% CI 1.179-2.110, p = 0.002). In this multicenter ED-based registry, steroid administration in the ED was associated with lower 28-day mortality among patients with septic shock, particularly those receiving vasopressin. Among hydrocortisone-treated patients, higher norepinephrine-equivalent dose at hydrocortisone initiation, a longer interval from vasopressor initiation to hydrocortisone administration, and hydrocortisone dose > 300 mg/day were associated with increased mortality; however, these findings should be interpreted cautiously as observational and hypothesis-generating.
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.