Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Dec;12(12):963-968.
doi: 10.12788/jhm.2929.

Hospital Perceptions of Medicare's Sepsis Quality Reporting Initiative

Affiliations

Hospital Perceptions of Medicare's Sepsis Quality Reporting Initiative

Ian J Barbash et al. J Hosp Med. 2017 Dec.

Abstract

Background: In October 2015, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented the Sepsis CMS Core Measure (SEP-1) program, requiring hospitals to report data on the quality of care for their patients with sepsis.

Objective: We sought to understand hospital perceptions of and responses to the SEP-1 program.

Design: A thematic content analysis of semistructured interviews with hospital quality officials.

Setting: A stratified random sample of short-stay, nonfederal, general acute care hospitals in the United States.

Patients: Hospital quality officers, including nurses and physicians.

Measurements: We completed 29 interviews before reaching content saturation.

Results: Hospitals reported a variety of actions in response to SEP-1, including new efforts to collect data, improve sepsis diagnosis and treatment, and manage clinicians' attitudes toward SEP-1. These efforts frequently required dedicated resources to meet the program's requirements for treatment and documentation, which were thought to be complex and not consistently linked to patient-centered outcomes. Most respondents felt that SEP-1 was likely to improve sepsis outcomes. At the same time, they described specific changes that could improve its effectiveness, including allowing hospitals to focus on the treatment processes most directly associated with improved patient outcomes and better aligning the measure's sepsis definitions with current clinical definitions.

Conclusions: Hospitals are responding to the SEP-1 program across a number of domains and in ways that consistently require dedicated resources. Hospitals are interested in further revisions to the program to alleviate the burden of the reporting requirements and help them optimize the effectiveness of their investments in quality-improvement efforts.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure: Aside from federal funding, the authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Comment in

  • Keeping It Simple in Sepsis Measures.
    Walkey AJ, Lindenauer PK. Walkey AJ, et al. J Hosp Med. 2017 Dec;12(12):1019-1020. doi: 10.12788/jhm.2873. J Hosp Med. 2017. PMID: 29236102 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

References

    1. Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3) JAMA. 2016;315(8):801–810. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0287. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, Lidicker J, Clermont G, Carcillo J, Pinsky MR. Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcome, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med. 2001;29(7):1303–1310. - PubMed
    1. Gaieski DF, Edwards JM, Kallan MJ, Carr BG. Benchmarking the incidence and mortality of severe sepsis in the United States. Crit Care Med. 2013;41(5):1167–1174. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31827c09f8. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Liu V, Escobar GJ, Greene JD, et al. Hospital deaths in patients with sepsis from 2 independent cohorts. JAMA. 2014;312(1):90–92. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.5804. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rhee C, Gohil S, Klompas M. Regulatory Mandates for Sepsis Care—Reasons for Caution. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(18):1673–1676. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1400276. - DOI - PMC - PubMed