Cargando…

2101. Impact of “Code Sepsis” on Antimicrobial Utilization at an Academic Medical Center

BACKGROUND: Balancing antimicrobial stewardship with sepsis management is a challenge. At our academic medical center, a “Code Sepsis” was implemented as a nursing driven initiative to improve early recognition and management of sepsis. Per protocol, Code Sepsis is activated in patients who meet two...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kang, Minji, Torriani, Francesca J, Sell, Rebecca, Abeles, Shira
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6808664/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1781
_version_ 1783461790134304768
author Kang, Minji
Torriani, Francesca J
Sell, Rebecca
Abeles, Shira
author_facet Kang, Minji
Torriani, Francesca J
Sell, Rebecca
Abeles, Shira
author_sort Kang, Minji
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Balancing antimicrobial stewardship with sepsis management is a challenge. At our academic medical center, a “Code Sepsis” was implemented as a nursing driven initiative to improve early recognition and management of sepsis. Per protocol, Code Sepsis is activated in patients who meet two or more systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria due to a suspected infection to allow for early implementation of the sepsis bundle, which includes laboratory testing, fluid resuscitation, and antibiotic administration (Figure 1). We analyzed the impact that Code Sepsis had on antimicrobial use among hospitalized patients over a six month period. METHODS: We reviewed the electronic medical records of hospitalized patients with Code Sepsis activation between January 1, 2018 and June 30, 2018 to determine whether antibiotics were “escalated” or “not escalated.” Among patients who had antibiotic escalation, escalation was classified as “indicated” or “not indicated” (Figure 2). A logistic regression model was used to identify characteristics, SIRS or organ dysfunction criteria predictive of indicated antimicrobial escalation. RESULTS: Code Sepsis was activated in 529 patients with antibiotics escalated in 247 (47%) and not escalated in 282 (53%) (Table 1). Among patients whose antibiotics were escalated, 64% (152) had an indication. In 36% (89), escalation was not indicated as Code Sepsis was due to a suspected noninfectious source, known infectious source already on appropriate antimicrobials, or a suspected infectious source in which diagnostic results had already shown the absence of the infection (Figure 2). Odds of indicated antibiotic escalation increased with the number of SIRS and organ dysfunction criteria (Table 2). CONCLUSION: In our efforts to improve sepsis outcomes, we focused on early recognition (Code Sepsis) and intervention (sepsis bundle). However, our Code Sepsis inadvertently led to antibiotic overutilization. By refocusing Code Sepsis on early recognition of severe sepsis and septic shock, we hope to optimize resource utilization and improve patient outcomes. [Image: see text] [Image: see text] [Image: see text] [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6808664
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68086642019-10-28 2101. Impact of “Code Sepsis” on Antimicrobial Utilization at an Academic Medical Center Kang, Minji Torriani, Francesca J Sell, Rebecca Abeles, Shira Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Balancing antimicrobial stewardship with sepsis management is a challenge. At our academic medical center, a “Code Sepsis” was implemented as a nursing driven initiative to improve early recognition and management of sepsis. Per protocol, Code Sepsis is activated in patients who meet two or more systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria due to a suspected infection to allow for early implementation of the sepsis bundle, which includes laboratory testing, fluid resuscitation, and antibiotic administration (Figure 1). We analyzed the impact that Code Sepsis had on antimicrobial use among hospitalized patients over a six month period. METHODS: We reviewed the electronic medical records of hospitalized patients with Code Sepsis activation between January 1, 2018 and June 30, 2018 to determine whether antibiotics were “escalated” or “not escalated.” Among patients who had antibiotic escalation, escalation was classified as “indicated” or “not indicated” (Figure 2). A logistic regression model was used to identify characteristics, SIRS or organ dysfunction criteria predictive of indicated antimicrobial escalation. RESULTS: Code Sepsis was activated in 529 patients with antibiotics escalated in 247 (47%) and not escalated in 282 (53%) (Table 1). Among patients whose antibiotics were escalated, 64% (152) had an indication. In 36% (89), escalation was not indicated as Code Sepsis was due to a suspected noninfectious source, known infectious source already on appropriate antimicrobials, or a suspected infectious source in which diagnostic results had already shown the absence of the infection (Figure 2). Odds of indicated antibiotic escalation increased with the number of SIRS and organ dysfunction criteria (Table 2). CONCLUSION: In our efforts to improve sepsis outcomes, we focused on early recognition (Code Sepsis) and intervention (sepsis bundle). However, our Code Sepsis inadvertently led to antibiotic overutilization. By refocusing Code Sepsis on early recognition of severe sepsis and septic shock, we hope to optimize resource utilization and improve patient outcomes. [Image: see text] [Image: see text] [Image: see text] [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6808664/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1781 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Abstracts
Kang, Minji
Torriani, Francesca J
Sell, Rebecca
Abeles, Shira
2101. Impact of “Code Sepsis” on Antimicrobial Utilization at an Academic Medical Center
title 2101. Impact of “Code Sepsis” on Antimicrobial Utilization at an Academic Medical Center
title_full 2101. Impact of “Code Sepsis” on Antimicrobial Utilization at an Academic Medical Center
title_fullStr 2101. Impact of “Code Sepsis” on Antimicrobial Utilization at an Academic Medical Center
title_full_unstemmed 2101. Impact of “Code Sepsis” on Antimicrobial Utilization at an Academic Medical Center
title_short 2101. Impact of “Code Sepsis” on Antimicrobial Utilization at an Academic Medical Center
title_sort 2101. impact of “code sepsis” on antimicrobial utilization at an academic medical center
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6808664/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1781
work_keys_str_mv AT kangminji 2101impactofcodesepsisonantimicrobialutilizationatanacademicmedicalcenter
AT torrianifrancescaj 2101impactofcodesepsisonantimicrobialutilizationatanacademicmedicalcenter
AT sellrebecca 2101impactofcodesepsisonantimicrobialutilizationatanacademicmedicalcenter
AT abelesshira 2101impactofcodesepsisonantimicrobialutilizationatanacademicmedicalcenter