Skip to content
Research Article Open access CC BY 3.0

Surviving Sepsis Campaign Bundles Adherence and Their Limits in Surgical Patients with Septic Shock in an ICU

Manfred Weiss, Florian Lautenschlager, Franz Porzsolt

Journal of Advances in Medicine and Medical Research · pp. 94–107 · Published 8 Dec 2012

10.9734/BJMMR/2013/1961

Abstract

Aims: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines aimed to reduce heterogeneity of conventional therapy and mortality. The present study was performed in septic shock to describe the adherence to the 2008 SSC guidelines, confounding factors, and limitations. Study Design: Prospective observational study. Place and Duration of Study: Clinic of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Medical School, and Clinical Economics at the Institute of History, Philosophy and Ethics in Medicine, University of Ulm, between January 2008 and June 2009. Methodology: The adherence to 36 items of the 6-hour and 24-hour bundles of the 2008 SSC guidelines was investigated in 98 surgical patients with septic shock. Results: The adherence to the 36 items varied between 0% and 95%. Besides the categories “adherent“ and “nonadherent“, additional categories “partially adherent“, “not-applicable“ and “unknown“ were used. None of the single items alone was essential for survival. Patients with septic shock on admission (n=68) had significantly higher SOFA scores (degree of organ dysfunctions) compared to patients developing septic shock in the ICU (n = 30). Conclusion: As many confounders are limiting the adherence to complex guidelines, the complete adherence will hardly be possible in severe diseases such as septic shock. Our results suggest that efforts associated with early diagnosis and active encouragement outside the ICU are necessary to improve applicability and adherence to the SSC guidelines in patients with septic shock in order to reduce the time lag of diagnosis and treatment, which may be reached by focusing on few essential points.

Critical illness intensive care units guideline adherence sepsis bundles shock septic/mortality/therapy

References (31)

  1. 1 APACHE II-A Severity of Disease Classification System [DOI]
  2. 2 Intensive Insulin Therapy in Critically Ill Patients [DOI]
  3. 3 Surviving Sepsis Campaign [DOI]
  4. 4 A new Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) based on a European/North American multicenter study [DOI]
  5. 5 Efficacy and Safety of Recombinant Human Activated Protein C for Severe Sepsis [DOI]
  6. 6 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference [DOI]
  7. 7 Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008 [DOI]
  8. 8 Use of the SOFA score to assess the incidence of organ dysfunction/failure in intensive care units [DOI]
  9. 9 Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock [DOI]
  10. 10 Effect of Treatment With Low Doses of Hydrocortisone and Fludrocortisone on Mortality in Patients With Septic Shock [DOI]
  11. 11 Intensive Insulin Therapy and Pentastarch Resuscitation in Severe Sepsis [DOI]
  12. 12 Hydrocortisone Therapy for Patients with Septic Shock [DOI]
  13. 13 SAPS 3—From evaluation of the patient to evaluation of the intensive care unit. Part 2: Development of a prognostic model for hospital mortality at ICU admission [DOI]
  14. 14 The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Results of an international guideline-based performance improvement program targeting severe sepsis* [DOI]
  15. 15 Improvement in Process of Care and Outcome After a Multicenter Severe Sepsis Educational Program in Spain [DOI]
  16. 16 Epidemiology of sepsis in Germany: results from a national prospective multicenter study [DOI]
  17. 17 The impact of compliance with 6-hour and 24-hour sepsis bundles on hospital mortality in patients with severe sepsis: a prospective observational study [DOI]
  18. 18 Practice and perception—A nationwide survey of therapy habits in sepsis* [DOI]
  19. 19 Epidemiology of sepsis in Germany: results from a national prospective multicenter study. Intensive Care Med
  20. 20 Cost-effectiveness of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign protocol for severe sepsis: a prospective nation-wide study in Spain [DOI]
  21. 21 Impact of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign on the recognition and management of severe sepsis in the emergency department: are we failing? [DOI]
  22. 22 Community‐acquired septic shock: early management and outcome in a nationwide study in Finland [DOI]
  23. 23 The Use of an Early Alert System to Improve Compliance with Sepsis Bundles and to Assess Impact on Mortality [DOI]
  24. 24 A survey of clinicians addressing the approach to the management of severe sepsis and septic shock in the United States [DOI]
  25. 25 Sepsis Bundles and Compliance With Clinical Guidelines [DOI]
  26. 26 Outcome of patients with sepsis and septic shock after ICU treatment [DOI]
  27. 27 Caring and Cost: The Challenge for Physician Advocacy [DOI]
  28. 28 Different patient case mix by applying the 2003 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS sepsis definitions instead of the 1992 ACCP/SCCM sepsis definitions in surgical patients: a retrospective observational study [DOI]
  29. 29 Drotrecogin alfa (activated): does current evidence support treatment for any patients with severe sepsis? [DOI]
  30. 30 Implementation of a bundle of actions to improve adherence to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines at the ED [DOI]
  31. 31 How many general and inflammatory variables need to be fulfilled when defining sepsis due to the 2003 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS definitions in critically ill surgical patients: a retrospective observational study [DOI]

Cited by 1

Relative impact of the 2012 SSC guideline recommendations under the scope of numbers needed to treat (NNTs).

Florian Lautenschlager, F. Porzsolt, M. Weiss · 2015

Related research

Article metrics

Real usage data collected on this platform.

54

Page views

0

PDF downloads

9

Outbound clicks

1

Citations

Views over time

Views by country

Approximate, from request IP at view time — not citizenship or institution. Countries with fewer than 5 views are grouped as "Other".

Traffic sources

Referring site, by host.

Views and downloads exclude known bots/crawlers. Citations combines this platform's own DOI-resolved index with each external source's own reported total — see Cited by above for individually listed citing works. Last refreshed 0 seconds ago.