Effect of a Sepsis Educational Intervention on Hospital Stay

Objectives: To evaluate adherence to the sepsis bundle before and after an educational strategy and its impact on hospital stay. Design: A prospective, analytic, before-and-after study of children with severe sepsis and septic shock who presented to the emergency department. Setting: Carried out from January to December 2014 in the emergency department of a quaternary care hospital. Patients: Of a total of 19,836 children who presented to the emergency department, 4,383 had an infectious pathology, with 203 of these showing severe sepsis and septic shock (124 pre intervention, and 79 post intervention). Interventions: The healthcare providers caring for the patients in pediatric emergency received an educational intervention and an update on the bundle concepts proposed in 2010 by the Pediatric Advanced Life Support program of the American Heart Association and adapted by this study's investigators. Measurements and Main Results: The main cause of sepsis in both groups was respiratory (59 vs 33; p = 0.72), without differences in the Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 score (7.23 vs 8.1; p = 0.23). The postintervention group showed a reduced hospital stay (11.6 vs 7.9 d; p = 0.01), a shorter time before ordering fluid boluses (247 vs 5 min; p = 0.001), the application of the first dose of antibiotic (343 vs 271 min; p = 0.03), and a decreased need for mechanical ventilation (20.1% vs 7.5%; p = 0.01). Postintervention adherence to the complete bundle was 19.2%, compared with the preintervention group, which was 27.7% (p = 0.17). Conclusions: Adherence to a bundle strategy is low following an educational intervention. However, when patients are managed after instruction in guideline recommendations, hospital stay may be significantly reduced. © 2018 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies

Endothelial Damage in Sepsis: The Importance of Systems Biology

The early diagnosis and appropriate stratification of sepsis continues to be one of the most important challenges in modern medicine. Single isolated biomarkers have not been enough to improve diagnostic and prognostic strategies and to progress toward therapeutic goals. The information generated by the human genome project has allowed a more holistic approach to the problem. The integration of genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics in sepsis has allowed us to progress in the knowledge of new pathways which are pathophysiologically involved in this disease. Thus, we have understood the importance of and complex interaction between the inflammatory response and the endothelium. Understanding the role of important parts of the microcirculation, such as the endothelial glycocalyx and its interaction with the inflammatory response, has provided early recognition elements for clinical practice that allow the rational use of traditional medical interventions in sepsis. This comprehensive approach, which differs from the classical mechanistic approach, uses systems biology to increase the diagnostic and prognostic spectrum of endothelial damage biomarkers in sepsis, and to provide information on new pathways involved in the pathophysiology of the disease. This, in turn, provides tools for perfecting traditional medical interventions, using them at the appropriate times according to the disease's pathophysiological context, while at the same time discovering new and improved therapeutic alternatives. We have the challenge of transferring this ideal scenario to our daily clinical practice to improve our patients' care. The purpose of this article is to provide a general description of the importance of systems biology in integrating the complex interaction between the endothelium and the inflammatory response in sepsis

Refining the Pediatric Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome

Since its introduction into the medical literature in the 1970s, the term multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (or some variant) has been applied broadly to any patient with >1 concurrent organ dysfunction. However, the epidemiology, mechanisms, time course, and outcomes among children with multiple organ dysfunction vary substantially. We posit that the term pediatric multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (or MODS) should be reserved for patients with a systemic pathologic state resulting from a common mechanism (or mechanisms) that affects numerous organ systems simultaneously. In contrast, children in whom organ injuries are attributable to distinct mechanisms should be considered to have additive organ system dysfunctions but not the syndrome of MODS. Although such differentiation may not always be possible with current scientific knowledge, we make the case for how attempts to differentiate multiple organ dysfunction from other states of additive organ dysfunctions can help to evolve clinical and research priorities in diagnosis, monitoring, and therapy from largely organ-specific to more holistic strategies

Scoring Systems for Organ Dysfunction and Multiple Organ Dysfunction: The PODIUM Consensus Conference

CONTEXT Multiple scores exist to characterize organ dysfunction in children. OBJECTIVE To review the literature on multiple organ dysfunction (MOD) scoring systems to estimate severity of illness and to characterize the performance characteristics of currently used scoring tools and clinical assessments for organ dysfunction in critically ill children. DATA SOURCES Electronic searches of PubMed and Embase were conducted from January 1992 to January 2020. STUDY SELECTION Studies were included if they evaluated critically ill children with MOD, evaluated the performance characteristics of scoring tools for MOD, and assessed outcomes related to mortality, functional status, organ-specific outcomes, or other patient-centered outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION Data were abstracted into a standard data extraction form by a task force member. RESULTS Of 1152 unique abstracts screened, 156 full text studies were assessed including a total of 54 eligible studies. The most commonly reported scores were the Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction Score (PELOD), pediatric Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (pSOFA), Pediatric Index of Mortality (PIM), PRISM, and counts of organ dysfunction using the International Pediatric Sepsis Definition Consensus Conference. Cut-offs for specific organ dysfunction criteria, diagnostic elements included, and use of counts versus weighting varied substantially. LIMITATIONS While scores demonstrated an increase in mortality associated with the severity and number of organ dysfunctions, the performance ranged widely. CONCLUSIONS The multitude of scores on organ dysfunction to assess severity of illness indicates a need for unified and data-driven organ dysfunction criteria, derived and validated in large, heterogenous international databases of critically ill children