Suppr超能文献

使用三种不同方法定义基线器官功能对全国队列中的脓毒症进行测量。

Measurement of Sepsis in a National Cohort Using Three Different Methods to Define Baseline Organ Function.

作者信息

Wayne Max T, Molling Daniel, Wang Xiao Qing, Hogan Cainnear K, Seelye Sarah, Liu Vincent X, Prescott Hallie C

机构信息

Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

VA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan; and.

出版信息

Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2021 Apr;18(4):648-655. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202009-1130OC.

Abstract

In 2017, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) developed a new surveillance definition of sepsis, the adult sepsis event (ASE), to better track sepsis epidemiology. The ASE requires evidence of acute organ dysfunction and defines baseline organ function pragmatically as the best in-hospital value. This approach may undercount sepsis if new organ dysfunction does not resolve by discharge. To understand how sepsis identification and outcomes differ when using the best laboratory values during hospitalization versus methods that use historical lookbacks to define baseline organ function. We identified all patients hospitalized at 138 Veterans Affairs hospitals (2013-2018) admitted via the emergency department with two or more systemic inflammatory response criteria, were treated with antibiotics within 48 hours (i.e., had potential infection), and completed 4+ days of antibiotics (i.e., had suspected infection). We considered the following three approaches to defining baseline renal, hematologic, and liver function: the best values during hospitalization (as in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's ASE), the best values during hospitalization plus the prior 90 days (3-mo baseline), and the best values during hospitalization plus the prior 180 days (6-mo baseline). We determined how many patients met the criteria for sepsis by each approach, and then compared characteristics and outcomes of sepsis hospitalizations between the three approaches. Among 608,128 hospitalizations with potential infection, 72.1%, 68.5%, and 58.4% had creatinine, platelet, and total bilirubin measured, respectively, in the prior 3 months. A total of 86.0%, 82.6%, and 74.8%, respectively, had these labs in the prior 6 months. Using the hospital baseline, 100,568 hospitalizations met criteria for community-acquired sepsis. By contrast, 111,983 and 117,435 met criteria for sepsis using the 3- and 6-month baselines, for a relative increase of 11% and 17%, respectively. Patient characteristics were similar across the three approaches. In-hospital mortality was 7.2%, 7.0%, and 6.8% for sepsis hospitalizations identified using the hospital, 3-month baseline, and 6-month baseline. The 30-day mortality was 12.5%, 12.7%, and 12.5%, respectively. Among veterans hospitalized with potential infection, the majority had laboratory values in the prior 6 months. Using 3- and 6-month lookbacks to define baseline organ function resulted in an 11% and 17% relative increase, respectively, in the number of sepsis hospitalizations identified.

摘要

2017年,美国疾病控制与预防中心(CDC)制定了一种新的脓毒症监测定义——成人脓毒症事件(ASE),以更好地追踪脓毒症的流行病学情况。ASE要求有急性器官功能障碍的证据,并将基线器官功能实际定义为住院期间的最佳值。如果新的器官功能障碍在出院时未得到缓解,这种方法可能会低估脓毒症的病例数。为了了解在使用住院期间的最佳实验室值与使用历史回顾法来定义基线器官功能的方法时,脓毒症的识别和结果有何不同。我们确定了138家退伍军人事务医院(2013 - 2018年)中所有通过急诊科入院、符合两条或更多全身炎症反应标准、在48小时内接受抗生素治疗(即有潜在感染)且完成4天以上抗生素治疗(即有疑似感染)的住院患者。我们考虑了以下三种定义基线肾、血液和肝功能的方法:住院期间的最佳值(如疾病控制与预防中心的ASE中那样)、住院期间的最佳值加上前90天(3个月基线)以及住院期间的最佳值加上前180天(6个月基线)。我们确定了每种方法下符合脓毒症标准的患者数量,然后比较了三种方法之间脓毒症住院患者的特征和结果。在608,128例有潜在感染的住院患者中,分别有72.1%、68.5%和58.4%在之前3个月内进行了肌酐、血小板和总胆红素检测。分别有86.0%、82.6%和74.8%在之前6个月内进行了这些检测。采用医院基线时,100,568例住院患者符合社区获得性脓毒症标准。相比之下,采用3个月和6个月基线时,分别有111,983例和117,435例符合脓毒症标准,相对增加分别为11%和17%。三种方法下患者特征相似。采用医院基线、3个月基线和6个月基线识别出的脓毒症住院患者的住院死亡率分别为7.2%、7.0%和6.8%。30天死亡率分别为12.5%、12.7%和12.5%。在有潜在感染的退伍军人住院患者中,大多数人在之前6个月内有实验室检测值。采用3个月和6个月回顾法来定义基线器官功能,分别使识别出的脓毒症住院患者数量相对增加了11%和17%。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

6
Adult emergency department referrals from urgent care centers.成人急诊从急诊中心转诊。
Am J Emerg Med. 2019 Oct;37(10):1949-1954. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2019.01.029. Epub 2019 Jan 17.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验