Hospital-Based Acute Care Use in Survivors of Septic Shock

OBJECTIVES: Septic shock is associated with increased long-term morbidity and mortality. However, little is known about the use of hospital-based acute care in survivors after hospital discharge. The objectives of the study were to examine the frequency, timing, causes, and risk factors associated with emergency department visits and hospital readmissions within 30 days of discharge. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary, academic hospital in the United States. PATIENTS: Patients admitted with septic shock (serum lactate ≥ 4 mmol/L or refractory hypotension) and discharged alive to a nonhospice setting between 2007 and 2010. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The coprimary outcomes were all-cause hospital readmission and emergency department visits (treat-and-release encounters) within 30 days to any of the three health system hospitals. Of 269 at-risk survivors, 63 (23.4%; 95% CI, 18.2-28.5) were readmitted within 30 days of discharge and another 12 (4.5%; 95% CI, 2.3-7.7) returned to the emergency department for a treat-and-release visit. Readmissions occurred within 15 days of discharge in 75% of cases and were more likely in oncology patients (p=0.001) and patients with a longer hospital length of stay (p=0.04). Readmissions were frequently due to another life-threatening condition and resulted in death or discharge to hospice in 16% of cases. The reasons for readmission were deemed potentially related to the index septic shock hospitalization in 78% (49 of 63) of cases. The most common cause was infection related, accounting for 46% of all 30-day readmissions, followed by cardiovascular or thromboembolic events (18%). CONCLUSIONS: The use of hospital-based acute care appeared to be common in septic shock survivors. Encounters often led to readmission within 15 days of discharge, were frequently due to another acute condition, and appeared to result in substantial morbidity and mortality. Given the potential public health implications of these findings, validation studies are needed

The sensitivity of qSOFA calculated at triage and during emergency department treatment to rapidly identify sepsis patients.

The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score has been proposed as a means to rapidly identify adult patients with suspected infection, in pre-hospital, Emergency Department (ED), or general hospital ward locations, who are in a high-risk category with increased likelihood of poor outcomes: a greater than 10% chance of dying or an increased likelihood of spending 3 or more days in the ICU. This score is intended to replace the use of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria as a screening tool; however, its role in ED screening and identification has yet to be fully elucidated. In this retrospective observational study, we explored the performance of triage qSOFA (tqSOFA), maximum qSOFA, and first initial serum lactate (\u3e 3 mmol/L) at predicting in-hospital mortality and compared these results to those for the initial SIRS criteria obtained in triage. A total of 2859 sepsis cases were included and the in-hospital mortality rate was 14.4%. The sensitivity of tqSOFA ≥ 2 and maximum qSOFA ≥ 2 to predict in-hospital mortality were 33% and 69%, respectively. For comparison, the triage SIRS criteria and the initial lactate \u3e 3 mmol/L had sensitivities of 82% and 65%, respectively. These results demonstrate that in a large ED sepsis database the earliest measurement of end organ impairment, tqSOFA, performed poorly at identifying patients at increased risk of mortality and maximum qSOFA did not significantly outperform initial serum lactate levels

Accuracy of Handheld Point-of-Care Fingertip Lactate Measurement in the Emergency Department

Introduction: Early recognition of elevated lactate levels in sepsis may hasten the detection of those patients eligible for aggressive resuscitation. Point-of-care (POC) testing is now increasingly available for use in the emergency department (ED). We examined the accuracy and time-saving effect of a handheld POC device for the measurement of fingertip and whole blood lactate as compared with reference laboratory testing in critically ill ED patients.Methods: A convenience sample of adult ED patients receiving serum lactate testing was prospectively enrolled at an urban, tertiary care US hospital. Consenting patients underwent fingertip POC lactate measurement with a portable device and simultaneous whole blood sampling for analysis by both the POC device and standard laboratory analyzer (‘‘reference method’’). Lactate measurements were compared by intraclass correlation (ICC) and Bland and Altman plots. Differences in time to test result were compared by paired t test.Results: Twenty-four patients, 19 (79%) with sepsis and 21 (88%) with lactate levels below 4 mmol/L, were included from April 2005 to May 2005. Fingertip POC and whole blood POC lactate measurements each correlated tightly with the reference method (ICC ¼ 0.90 and ICC ¼ 0.92, respectively). Mean time between obtaining fingertip lactate samples and whole blood reference lactate samples was 8 6 13 minutes. Mean time between obtaining POC and reference laboratory lactate results was 65 minutes (95% confidence interval, 30–103).Conclusion: Fingertip POC lactate measurement is an accurate method to determine lactate levels in infected ED patients with normal or modestly elevated lactate values and significantly decreases time to test results. These findings should be verified in a larger, more critically ill, ED population. [West J Emerg Med. 2013;14(1):58-62.

Accuracy of Handheld Point-of-Care Fingertip Lactate Measurement in the Emergency Department

Introduction: Early recognition of elevated lactate levels in sepsis may hasten the detection of those patients eligible for aggressive resuscitation. Point-of-care (POC) testing is now increasingly available for use in the emergency department (ED). We examined the accuracy and time-saving effect of a handheld POC device for the measurement of fingertip and whole blood lactate as compared with reference laboratory testing in critically ill ED patients.Methods: A convenience sample of adult ED patients receiving serum lactate testing was prospectively enrolled at an urban, tertiary care US hospital. Consenting patients underwent fingertip POC lactate measurement with a portable device and simultaneous whole blood sampling for analysis by both the POC device and standard laboratory analyzer (‘‘reference method’’). Lactate measurements were compared by intraclass correlation (ICC) and Bland and Altman plots. Differences in time to test result were compared by paired t test.Results: Twenty-four patients, 19 (79%) with sepsis and 21 (88%) with lactate levels below 4 mmol/L, were included from April 2005 to May 2005. Fingertip POC and whole blood POC lactate measurements each correlated tightly with the reference method (ICC ¼ 0.90 and ICC ¼ 0.92, respectively). Mean time between obtaining fingertip lactate samples and whole blood reference lactate samples was 8 6 13 minutes. Mean time between obtaining POC and reference laboratory lactate results was 65 minutes (95% confidence interval, 30–103).Conclusion: Fingertip POC lactate measurement is an accurate method to determine lactate levels in infected ED patients with normal or modestly elevated lactate values and significantly decreases time to test results. These findings should be verified in a larger, more critically ill, ED population. [West J Emerg Med. 2013;14(1):58-62.

Обследование фундаментов исторического здания «Дом игумена» в г.Чернигове

BACKGROUND: Occupational exposure is an important consideration during emergency department thoracotomy (EDT). While human immunodeficiency virus/hepatitis prevalence in trauma patients (0-16.8%) and occupational exposure rates during operative trauma procedures (1.9-18.0%) have been reported, exposure risk during EDT is unknown. We hypothesized that occupational exposure risk during EDT would be greater than other operative trauma procedures. METHODS: A prospective, observational study at 16 US trauma centers was performed (2015-2016). All bedside EDT resuscitation providers were surveyed with a standardized data collection tool and risk factors analyzed with respect to the primary end point, EDT occupational exposure (percutaneous injury, mucous membrane, open wound, or eye splash). Provider and patient variables and outcomes were evaluated with single and multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred sixty participants (23% attending, 59% trainee, 11% nurse, 7% other) were surveyed after 305 EDTs (gunshot wound, 68%; prehospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 57%; emergency department signs of life, 37%), of which 15 patients survived (13 neurologically intact) their hospitalization. Overall, 22 occupational exposures were documented, resulting in an exposure rate of 7.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.7-10.5%) per EDT and 1.6% (95% CI, 1.0-2.4%) per participant. No differences in trauma center level, number of participants, or hours worked were identified. Providers with exposures were primarily trainees (68%) with percutaneous injuries (86%) during the thoracotomy (73%). Full precautions were utilized in only 46% of exposed providers, while multiple variable logistic regression determined that each personal protective equipment item utilized during EDT correlated with a 34% decreased risk of occupational exposure (odds ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.91; p = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the risk of occupational exposure should not deter providers from performing EDT. Despite the small risk of viral transmission, our data revealed practices that may place health care providers at unnecessary risk of occupational exposure. Regardless of the lifesaving nature of the procedure, improved universal precaution compliance with personal protective equipment is paramount and would further minimize occupational exposure risks during EDT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management study, level III