Centre de Recherches Médicales de Lambaréné (CERMEL) and African Partner Institution, Lambaréné, Gabon; Center of Tropical Medicine and Travel Medicine, Department of Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location AMC, Amsterdam Infection & Immunity, Amsterdam Public Health, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Malawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Trust, Blantyre, Malawi; Department of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Acta Trop. 2021 Jul;219:105914. doi: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2021.105914. Epub 2021 Apr 6.
Background In 2016, the third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3) task force provided revised definitions for sepsis and septic shock. This study explores knowledge regarding sepsis among health workers in Lambaréné, Gabon. Methods We conducted a self-administered questionnaire-based survey about sepsis among health workers from the referral regional hospital, the research center, and primary care health facilities in the Lambaréné region. Participants were from the referral regional hospital, the research center, and primary health care facilities. A score of one was given to each correct answer. The global score out of a possible score of twenty was calculated, and the proportion of correct responses was determined. Results A total of 115 health workers (physicians, nurses and assistant nurses) completed the questionnaire, of which 48.7% (56/115) provided a valid definition of sepsis, but 74% (85/115) had never heard about the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score. The proportion of correct answers was comparable across the three health profession categories. The median global score across all health workers was 11 [IQR, 9-14.5] out of 20. Physicians attained higher global scores [14 (IQR, 11-15)] than assistant nurses [11 (IQR, 8-13), P=0.007]; their global score was comparable to that of nurses. Conclusion There are considerable knowledge gaps regarding sepsis among health workers in Lambaréné, potentially impairing the prompt recognition and management of sepsis. There is a need to establish periodic up-to-date training to improve sepsis knowledge.
背景 2016 年，第三届国际脓毒症和脓毒性休克定义共识（Sepsis-3）工作组对脓毒症和脓毒性休克的定义进行了修订。本研究旨在探讨加蓬兰巴雷内地区卫生工作者对脓毒症的认知情况。
方法 我们对兰巴雷内地区的转诊区域医院、研究中心和初级保健医疗机构的卫生工作者进行了一项基于自我管理问卷的脓毒症调查。参与者来自转诊区域医院、研究中心和初级保健医疗机构。每个正确答案得 1 分。计算出 20 分制的全球得分，并确定正确回答的比例。
结果 共有 115 名卫生工作者（医生、护士和助理护士）完成了问卷，其中 48.7%（56/115）提供了脓毒症的有效定义，但 74%（85/115）从未听说过快速序贯器官衰竭评估（qSOFA）评分。三个卫生专业类别的正确答案比例相当。所有卫生工作者的全球中位数得分为 11 [IQR，9-14.5]分。医生的全球得分[14（IQR，11-15）]高于助理护士[11（IQR，8-13），P=0.007]，与护士的全球得分相当。
结论 兰巴雷内地区卫生工作者对脓毒症存在相当大的知识差距，可能会影响脓毒症的及时识别和处理。有必要定期进行最新培训，以提高脓毒症知识水平。
