2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/621695
Category:
Full-text
Format:
Text-based Document
Type:
Presentation
Level of Evidence:
N/A
Research Approach:
N/A
Title:
Predictors of Survival for Patients With a Diagnosis of Sepsis
Other Titles:
Promoting Outcomes in the Infectious Patient
Author(s):
Reina Failla, Kim; Connelly, Cynthia D.
Lead Author STTI Affiliation:
Gamma Gamma
Author Details:
Kim Reina Failla, PhD, RN, NE-BC, Professional Experience: Professional Experience: 2010 to Present, Manager – Sharp Memorial Hospital (Nurse Residency Program); 2014 to Present, Clinical Adjunct Faculty – University of San Diego; 2005 to 2010, Manager - Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women and Newborns (NICU); 2000 to 2005, Clinical Lead Nurse - Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women and Newborns (NICU); 1998 to 2000, Clinical Nurse – Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women and Newborns (NICU). Author Summary: Dr. Failla has oversight of new graduate nurse onboarding including recruitment, professional development, and curriculum design. She formerly managed the largest Neonatal Intensive Care Unit in California where she had oversight of professional practice, resource management, and quality outcomes data. She is a frequent speaker at national conferences.
Abstract:

Purpose:

Sepsis is a major public health priority. Sepsis-related diagnoses are life-threatening global health care conditions that may lead to organ failure, shock, and death. The rate of associated hospitalizations doubled from 2000 through 2008; sepsis was the leading cause of death in the United States in 2010 and was noted to be the single most expensive condition treated in hospitals in 2011 (Walkey, Lagu, & Lindenauer, 2015). Despite advances in the recognition and treatment of sepsis, mortality remains at 30%. By 2020, an estimated additional one million cases annually are projected to occur due to the aging population, increased invasive procedures, and comorbidities (Leedahl, Personett, Gajic, Kashyap, & Schramm, 2014). Predictors of survival for those with sepsis are inconclusive. Notably, clinical sepsis studies evaluating the influence of gender on survival are not clear (Jacobson, Liedgren, Johnsson, Ferm, & Winso, 2012; Madsen et al., 2014; Nachtigall et al., 2011). Contributors to disparities have been attributed to differences in clinical presentation and health care delivery (Soto et al., 2013). The purpose of this completed study was to identify factors including gender that affect survival for patients with a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock.

Methods:

After Institutional Review Board approval, the study was conducted in a large metropolitan, non-profit, Magnet recognized, acute care hospital located in the Southwestern region of the United States. This study used a retrospective, descriptive correlational design. A sample of patients, 18 years or older presenting to the emergency department and who subsequently met the criteria for a discharge diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock as defined by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign provided data for this study (Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2015). Data on patient characteristics, clinical variables, care management processes, and outcomes were extracted from the electronic medical record and analyzed. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed using International Business Machines Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for Windows, Version 23.0.

Results:

Data were reviewed for all patients with a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock and 482 patients met inclusion criteria: Males (248, 51.5%); Females (234, 48.5%). Exclusion criteria included patients who had previously selected end-of-life or palliative care measures upon admission. The mean age for all patients was 67.9 years (SD 16.5). The majority of patients were White (51%), with 16.6% Hispanic, 14.9% Asian, 5.8% Black, and 11.6% other. The majority of the patients were diagnosed with septic shock (62.2%) compared to severe sepsis (37.8%).

Logistic regression with eight independent variables included: (1) discharge diagnosis, (2) age, (3) comorbidities, (4) length of hospital stay, (5) source of infection, (6) first lactate level, (7) recommended fluids administered, and (8) gender. All independent variables reliably predicted which patients would survive χ2 (12, 423) = 118.39, p < .001 and correctly classified 77.3% of cases. All independent variables significantly contributed to the model, but the model revealed females had a higher likelihood of hospital mortality than males (OR = 1.68; 95% CI, 1.01-2.79; < .05)Limitations of the study included potential selection bias since the study was observational and lacked a random sample of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Additionally, because all data were extracted from the electronic medical record, providers’ undocumented impressions of diagnosis, source of infection, and/or severity of illness may have affected care processes.

Conclusion:

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign has provided a clear path for patients with sepsis-related diagnoses including the need for early recognition and treatment interventions (Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2015). Previous studies have identified more rapid identification of patients at risk for sepsis through electronic medical record enhancements, sepsis response teams, and interprofessional education and simulation (Palleschi, Sirianni, O’Connor, Dunn, & Hasenau, 2014; Schramm, Kashyap, Mullon, Ognjen, & Afessa, 2011). Therapeutic strategies are needed to address gender differences and there are opportunities to address decision-making with regard to potential bias. New or revised policies may be established to safeguard against disparity between genders and educational efforts may be employed to build awareness surrounding the different illness presentations exhibited by females versus males. Aggressive applications of evidence-based interventions may result in better patient outcomes. The study findings have global implications for future studies in addressing if gender disparities exist in the use of validated sepsis therapies.

Keywords:
gender; sepsis; survival
Repository Posting Date:
6-Jul-2017
Date of Publication:
6-Jul-2017
Other Identifiers:
INRC17E14
Conference Date:
2017
Conference Name:
28th International Nursing Research Congress
Conference Host:
Sigma Theta Tau International
Conference Location:
Dublin, Ireland
Description:
Event Theme: Influencing Global Health Through the Advancement of Nursing Scholarship

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.type.categoryFull-texten
dc.formatText-based Documenten
dc.typePresentationen
dc.evidence.levelN/Aen
dc.research.approachN/Aen
dc.titlePredictors of Survival for Patients With a Diagnosis of Sepsisen_US
dc.title.alternativePromoting Outcomes in the Infectious Patienten
dc.contributor.authorReina Failla, Kimen
dc.contributor.authorConnelly, Cynthia D.en
dc.contributor.departmentGamma Gammaen
dc.author.detailsKim Reina Failla, PhD, RN, NE-BC, Professional Experience: Professional Experience: 2010 to Present, Manager – Sharp Memorial Hospital (Nurse Residency Program); 2014 to Present, Clinical Adjunct Faculty – University of San Diego; 2005 to 2010, Manager - Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women and Newborns (NICU); 2000 to 2005, Clinical Lead Nurse - Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women and Newborns (NICU); 1998 to 2000, Clinical Nurse – Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women and Newborns (NICU). Author Summary: Dr. Failla has oversight of new graduate nurse onboarding including recruitment, professional development, and curriculum design. She formerly managed the largest Neonatal Intensive Care Unit in California where she had oversight of professional practice, resource management, and quality outcomes data. She is a frequent speaker at national conferences.en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/621695-
dc.description.abstract<p><strong>Purpose:</strong></p> <p>Sepsis is a major public health priority. Sepsis-related diagnoses are life-threatening global health care conditions that may lead to organ failure, shock, and death. The rate of associated hospitalizations doubled from 2000 through 2008; sepsis was the leading cause of death in the United States in 2010 and was noted to be the single most expensive condition treated in hospitals in 2011 (Walkey, Lagu, & Lindenauer, 2015). Despite advances in the recognition and treatment of sepsis, mortality remains at 30%. By 2020, an estimated additional one million cases annually are projected to occur due to the aging population, increased invasive procedures, and comorbidities (Leedahl, Personett, Gajic, Kashyap, & Schramm, 2014). Predictors of survival for those with sepsis are inconclusive. Notably, clinical sepsis studies evaluating the influence of gender on survival are not clear (Jacobson, Liedgren, Johnsson, Ferm, & Winso, 2012; Madsen et al., 2014; Nachtigall et al., 2011). Contributors to disparities have been attributed to differences in clinical presentation and health care delivery (Soto et al., 2013). The purpose of this completed study was to identify factors including gender that affect survival for patients with a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock.</p> <p><strong>Methods:</strong></p> <p>After Institutional Review Board approval, the study was conducted in a large metropolitan, non-profit, Magnet recognized, acute care hospital located in the Southwestern region of the United States. This study used a retrospective, descriptive correlational design. A sample of patients, 18 years or older presenting to the emergency department and who subsequently met the criteria for a discharge diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock as defined by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign provided data for this study (Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2015). Data on patient characteristics, clinical variables, care management processes, and outcomes were extracted from the electronic medical record and analyzed. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed using International Business Machines Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for Windows, Version 23.0.</p> <p><strong>Results:</strong></p> <p>Data were reviewed for all patients with a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock and 482 patients met inclusion criteria: Males (248, 51.5%); Females (234, 48.5%). Exclusion criteria included patients who had previously selected end-of-life or palliative care measures upon admission. The mean age for all patients was 67.9 years (SD 16.5). The majority of patients were White (51%), with 16.6% Hispanic, 14.9% Asian, 5.8% Black, and 11.6% other. The majority of the patients were diagnosed with septic shock (62.2%) compared to severe sepsis (37.8%).</p> <p>Logistic regression with eight independent variables included: (1) discharge diagnosis, (2) age, (3) comorbidities, (4) length of hospital stay, (5) source of infection, (6) first lactate level, (7) recommended fluids administered, and (8) gender. All independent variables reliably predicted which patients would survive χ<sup>2</sup> (12, 423) = 118.39, <em>p</em> < .001 and correctly classified 77.3% of cases. All independent variables significantly contributed to the model, but the model revealed females had a higher likelihood of hospital mortality than males (OR = 1.68; 95% CI, 1.01-2.79; <em>p </em>< .05)<em>. </em>Limitations of the study included potential selection bias since the study was observational and lacked a random sample of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Additionally, because all data were extracted from the electronic medical record, providers’ undocumented impressions of diagnosis, source of infection, and/or severity of illness may have affected care processes.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion:</strong></p> <p>The Surviving Sepsis Campaign has provided a clear path for patients with sepsis-related diagnoses including the need for early recognition and treatment interventions (Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2015). Previous studies have identified more rapid identification of patients at risk for sepsis through electronic medical record enhancements, sepsis response teams, and interprofessional education and simulation (Palleschi, Sirianni, O’Connor, Dunn, & Hasenau, 2014; Schramm, Kashyap, Mullon, Ognjen, & Afessa, 2011). Therapeutic strategies are needed to address gender differences and there are opportunities to address decision-making with regard to potential bias. New or revised policies may be established to safeguard against disparity between genders and educational efforts may be employed to build awareness surrounding the different illness presentations exhibited by females versus males. Aggressive applications of evidence-based interventions may result in better patient outcomes. The study findings have global implications for future studies in addressing if gender disparities exist in the use of validated sepsis therapies.</p>en
dc.subjectgenderen
dc.subjectsepsisen
dc.subjectsurvivalen
dc.date.available2017-07-06T19:32:20Z-
dc.date.issued2017-07-06-
dc.date.accessioned2017-07-06T19:32:20Z-
dc.conference.date2017en
dc.conference.name28th International Nursing Research Congressen
dc.conference.hostSigma Theta Tau Internationalen
dc.conference.locationDublin, Irelanden
dc.descriptionEvent Theme: Influencing Global Health Through the Advancement of Nursing Scholarshipen
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.