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
. 2024 Aug;52(4):1325-1335.
doi: 10.1007/s15010-024-02181-5. Epub 2024 Feb 19.

Sepsis incidence, suspicion, prediction and mortality in emergency medical services: a cohort study related to the current international sepsis guideline

Silke Piedmont  1   2 , Ludwig Goldhahn  3 , Enno Swart  3 , Bernt-Peter Robra  3 , Carolin Fleischmann-Struzek  4 , Rajan Somasundaram  5 , Wolfgang Bauer  5
Affiliations

Sepsis incidence, suspicion, prediction and mortality in emergency medical services: a cohort study related to the current international sepsis guideline

Silke Piedmont et al. Infection. 2024 Aug.

Abstract

Purpose: Sepsis suspicion by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is associated with improved patient outcomes. This study assessed sepsis incidence and recognition by EMS and analyzed which of the screening tools recommended by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign best facilitates sepsis prediction.

Methods: Retrospective cohort study of claims data from health insurances (n = 221,429 EMS cases), and paramedics' and emergency physicians' EMS documentation (n = 110,419); analyzed outcomes were: sepsis incidence and case fatality compared to stroke and myocardial infarction, the extent of documentation for screening-relevant variables and sepsis suspicion, tools' intersections for screening positive in identical EMS cases and their predictive ability for an inpatient sepsis diagnosis.

Results: Incidence of sepsis (1.6%) was similar to myocardial infarction (2.6%) and stroke (2.7%); however, 30-day case fatality rate was almost threefold higher (31.7% vs. 13.4%; 11.8%). Complete vital sign documentation was achieved in 8.2% of all cases. Paramedics never, emergency physicians rarely (0.1%) documented a sepsis suspicion, respectively septic shock. NEWS2 had the highest sensitivity (73.1%; Specificity:81.6%) compared to qSOFA (23.1%; Sp:96.6%), SIRS (28.2%; Sp:94.3%) and MEWS (48.7%; Sp:88.1%). Depending on the tool, 3.7% to 19.4% of all cases screened positive; only 0.8% in all tools simultaneously.

Conclusion: Incidence and mortality underline the need for better sepsis awareness, documentation of vital signs and use of screening tools. Guidelines may omit MEWS and SIRS as recommendations for prehospital providers since they were inferior in all accuracy measures. Though no tool performed ideally, NEWS2 qualifies as the best tool to predict the highest proportion of septic patients and to rule out cases that are likely non-septic.

Keywords: Emergency medical services; Incidence; Mortality; Paramedic; Screening; Sepsis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors have no conflict of interest to declare. The data were acquired as part of the project “Integrated emergency care: A focus on emergency medical services” (http://rettungsdienst-im-fokus.ovgu.de) which was funded by the German Innovation Fund of the Joint Federal Committee (G-BA) (funding identifier: 01VSF17032). The funder had no influence on the published results.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Sample sizes for individual analyses on case level (Dataset #3: To be linkable, EMS cases had to be billed by respective health insurance company [dataset #1] and conducted by respective EMS provider [dataset #2])
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
In-hospital and 30-day case fatality for inpatient sepsis, myocardial infarction and stroke following EMS use (Dataset #1)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Schematic representation of intersections between screening tools (imputed, linked dataset #3; patient age ≥ 18 years). A Percent and in square brackets absolute number of positive screenings (consisting of true-positives and false-positives) out of n = 4503 cases (of those, n = 78 had a confirmed inpatient sepsis). B Percent and in square brackets absolute number of true-positive cases out of all patients with a confirmed inpatient sepsis (n = 78)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Rudd KE, Johnson SC, Agesa KM, Shackelford KA, Tsoi D, Kievlan DR, et al. Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990–2017: analysis for the global burden of disease study. Lancet. 2020;395:200–11. 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32989-7. 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32989-7 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE, Light B, Parrillo JE, Sharma S, et al. Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2006;34:1589–96. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000217961.75225.E9. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000217961.75225.E9 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ferrer R, Martin-Loeches I, Phillips G, Osborn TM, Townsend S, Dellinger RP, et al. Empiric antibiotic treatment reduces mortality in severe sepsis and septic shock from the first hour: results from a guideline-based performance improvement program. Crit Care Med. 2014;42:1749–55. 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000330. 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000330 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bloos F, Rüddel H, Thomas-Rüddel D, Schwarzkopf D, Pausch C, Harbarth S, et al. Effect of a multifaceted educational intervention for anti-infectious measures on sepsis mortality: a cluster randomized trial. Intensive Care Med. 2017;43:1602–12. 10.1007/s00134-017-4782-4. 10.1007/s00134-017-4782-4 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fay K, Sapiano MRP, Gokhale R, Dantes R, Thompson N, Katz DE, et al. Assessment of health care exposures and outcomes in adult patients with sepsis and septic shock. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3: e206004. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.6004. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.6004 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources