Struble Roger D, Arakkal Alan T, Cavanaugh Joseph E, Polgreen Philip M, Miller Aaron C
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.
Department of Biostatistics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.
Crit Care Explor. 2025 Apr 2;7(4):e1240. doi: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000001240. eCollection 2025 Apr 1.
Delays in diagnosing sepsis may increase morbidity and mortality, but the frequency of delays is poorly understood.
The aim of this study was to estimate the frequency and duration of diagnostic delays for sepsis and potential risk factors for delay.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a retrospective case-crossover analysis of sepsis cases from 2016 to 2019 using claims from Merative MarketScan. We ascertained the index diagnosis of sepsis and corresponding hospitalization. We analyzed healthcare visits in the 180 days before diagnosis and then compared the observed and expected trends in signs or symptoms of infection, immune or organ dysfunction (e.g., fever, dyspnea) during the 14 days before diagnosis. A bootstrapping approach was used to estimate the frequency and duration of potential diagnostic delays along with possible risk-factors for experiencing a delay.
The number of patients who experienced a potential diagnostic delay, duration of delay, and number of potential missed opportunities.
We identified a total of 649,756 cases of sepsis from 2016 to 2019 meeting inclusion criteria. There was an increase in visits with signs or symptoms of infection, immune or organ dysfunction just before the index diagnosis of sepsis. We estimated that around 16.57% (95% CI, 16.38-16.78) of patients experienced a potential diagnostic delay, with a mean delay duration of 3.21 days (95% CI, 3.13-3.27) and a median of 2 days. Most delays occurred in outpatient settings. Potential diagnostic delays were more frequent among younger age groups and patients who received antibiotics (odds ratio [OR] 2.58 [95% CI, 2.54-2.62]), or treatments for particular symptoms, including opioids (OR 1.43 [95% CI, 1.40-1.46]) and inhalers (OR 1.37 [95% CI, 1.33-1.40]).
There may be a substantial number of potential missed opportunities to diagnose sepsis, especially in outpatient settings. Multiple factors might contribute to delays in diagnosing sepsis including commonly prescribed medications for symptoms.
脓毒症诊断延迟可能会增加发病率和死亡率,但人们对延迟的频率了解甚少。
本研究旨在估计脓毒症诊断延迟的频率和持续时间以及延迟的潜在风险因素。
设计、背景和参与者:我们使用Merative MarketScan的索赔数据对2016年至2019年的脓毒症病例进行了回顾性病例交叉分析。我们确定了脓毒症的索引诊断和相应的住院情况。我们分析了诊断前180天内的医疗就诊情况,然后比较了诊断前14天内感染、免疫或器官功能障碍(如发热、呼吸困难)的体征或症状的观察趋势和预期趋势。采用自举法来估计潜在诊断延迟的频率和持续时间以及出现延迟的可能风险因素。
经历潜在诊断延迟的患者数量、延迟持续时间以及潜在错失机会的数量。
我们共确定了2016年至2019年符合纳入标准的649,756例脓毒症病例。在脓毒症索引诊断前,感染、免疫或器官功能障碍的体征或症状就诊次数有所增加。我们估计约16.57%(95%CI,16.38 - 16.78)的患者经历了潜在诊断延迟,平均延迟持续时间为3.21天(95%CI,3.13 - 3.27),中位数为2天。大多数延迟发生在门诊环境中。潜在诊断延迟在较年轻年龄组和接受抗生素治疗的患者中更为频繁(优势比[OR] 2.58 [95%CI,2.54 - 2.62]),或接受针对特定症状治疗的患者中更为频繁,包括阿片类药物(OR 1.43 [95%CI,1.40 - 1.46])和吸入器(OR 1.37 [95%CI,1.33 - 1.40])。
诊断脓毒症可能存在大量潜在的错失机会,尤其是在门诊环境中。多种因素可能导致脓毒症诊断延迟,包括常用的症状治疗药物。