Implementation and outcomes of the Multiple Urgent Sepsis Therapies (MUST) protocol
- PMID: 16484890
- DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000206104.18647.A8
Implementation and outcomes of the Multiple Urgent Sepsis Therapies (MUST) protocol
Abstract
Objectives: To describe the effectiveness of a comprehensive, interdisciplinary sepsis treatment protocol with regard to both implementation and outcomes and to compare the mortality rates and therapies of patients with septic shock with similar historical controls.
Design: Prospective, interventional cohort study with a historical control comparison group.
Setting: Urban, tertiary care, university hospital with 46,000 emergency department visits and 4,100 intensive care unit admissions annually.
Patients: Inclusion criteria were a) emergency department patients aged > or =18 yrs, b) suspected infection, and c) lactate of >4 mmol/L or septic shock. Exclusion criteria were a) emergent operation, b) prehospital cardiac arrest, and c) comfort measures only. Time period: protocol, November 10, 2003, through November 9, 2004; historical controls, February 1, 2000, through January 31, 2001.
Intervention: A sepsis treatment pathway incorporating empirical antibiotics, early goal-directed therapy, drotrecogin alfa, steroids, intensive insulin therapy, and lung-protective ventilation.
Measurements and main results: There were 116 protocol patients, with a mortality rate of 18% (11-25%), of which 79 patients had septic shock. Comparing these patients with 51 historical controls, protocol patients received more fluid (4.0 vs. 2.5 L crystalloid, p < .001), earlier antibiotics (90 vs. 120 mins, p < .013), more appropriate empirical coverage (97% vs. 88%, p < .05), more vasopressors in the first 6 hrs (80% vs. 45%, p < .001), tighter glucose control (mean morning glucose, 123 vs. 140, p < .001), and more frequent assessment of adrenal function (82% vs. 10%, p < .001), with a nonstatistically significant increase in dobutamine use (14% vs. 4%, p = .06) and red blood cell transfusions (30% vs. 18%, p = .07) in the first 24 hrs. For protocol patients with septic shock, 28-day in-hospital mortality was 20.3% compared with 29.4% for historical controls (p = .3).
Conclusions: Clinical implementation of a comprehensive sepsis treatment protocol is feasible and is associated with changes in therapies such as time to antibiotics, intravenous fluid delivery, and vasopressor use in the first 6 hrs. No statistically significant decrease in mortality was demonstrated, as this trial was not sufficiently powered to assess mortality benefits.
Comment in
-
Applying the evidence: multiple urgent therapies for patients with sepsis.Crit Care Med. 2006 Apr;34(4):1264-5. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000208323.51198.8E. Crit Care Med. 2006. PMID: 16550084 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Implementation of a bundle of quality indicators for the early management of severe sepsis and septic shock is associated with decreased mortality.Crit Care Med. 2007 Apr;35(4):1105-12. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000259463.33848.3D. Crit Care Med. 2007. PMID: 17334251
-
A modified goal-directed protocol improves clinical outcomes in intensive care unit patients with septic shock: a randomized controlled trial.Shock. 2006 Dec;26(6):551-7. doi: 10.1097/01.shk.0000232271.09440.8f. Shock. 2006. PMID: 17117128 Clinical Trial.
-
The costs and cost-effectiveness of an integrated sepsis treatment protocol.Crit Care Med. 2008 Apr;36(4):1168-74. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318168f649. Crit Care Med. 2008. PMID: 18379243
-
The current management of septic shock.Minerva Med. 2008 Oct;99(5):431-58. Minerva Med. 2008. PMID: 18971911 Review.
-
Severe sepsis and septic shock: improving outcomes in the emergency department.Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2008 Aug;26(3):603-23, vii. doi: 10.1016/j.emc.2008.05.004. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2008. PMID: 18655937 Review.
Cited by
-
SOFA and qSOFA at admission to the emergency department: Diagnostic sensitivity and relation with prognosis in patients with suspected infection.Turk J Emerg Med. 2019 Jun 8;19(3):106-110. doi: 10.1016/j.tjem.2019.05.002. eCollection 2019 Jul. Turk J Emerg Med. 2019. PMID: 31321343 Free PMC article.
-
[New sepsis guidelines yet again: is that necessary?].Anaesthesist. 2010 Apr;59(4):295-6. doi: 10.1007/s00101-010-1722-x. Anaesthesist. 2010. PMID: 20379691 German. No abstract available.
-
A survey of Canadian intensivists' resuscitation practices in early septic shock.Crit Care. 2007;11(4):R74. doi: 10.1186/cc5962. Crit Care. 2007. PMID: 17623059 Free PMC article.
-
The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: results of an international guideline-based performance improvement program targeting severe sepsis.Intensive Care Med. 2010 Feb;36(2):222-31. doi: 10.1007/s00134-009-1738-3. Epub 2010 Jan 13. Intensive Care Med. 2010. PMID: 20069275 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Pathophysiology of sepsis.Am J Pathol. 2007 May;170(5):1435-44. doi: 10.2353/ajpath.2007.060872. Am J Pathol. 2007. PMID: 17456750 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources