TY - JOUR
T1 - Implementation of early goal-directed therapy and the surviving sepsis campaign resuscitation bundle in Asia
AU - Na, Sungwon
AU - Kuan, Win Sen
AU - Mahadevan, Malcolm
AU - Li, Chih Huang
AU - Shrikhande, Pinak
AU - Ray, Sumit
AU - Batech, Michael
AU - Bryant Nguyen, H.
AU - Varma, Amit
AU - Joshi, Mahesh
AU - Subhan, Imron
AU - Chen, Shyr Chyr
AU - Tyagi, Niraj
AU - Yiming, Ly
AU - Ying, Zhu
N1 - Funding Information:
The investigator meetings for this study were supported by Edwards Lifesciences, Asia Pacific, Singapore, in the form of administrative support and travel funding. H.B.N. received funding support from Edwards Lifesciences, Asia Pacific, Singapore, to lead the study investigator meetings. The study sites received educational support from Edwards
PY - 2012/10
Y1 - 2012/10
N2 - OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of implementing sepsis bundle in multiple Asian countries, having 'team' vs. 'non-team' models of patient care.DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.SETTING: Eight urban hospitals, five countries in Asia.PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with severe sepsis or septic shock.INTERVENTIONS: Implementation was divided into six quartiles: Baseline, Education and four Quality Improvement quartiles.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quarterly bundle compliance and in-hospital mortality with respect to bundle completion and implementation model.METHODS: In the team model, the implementation was championed by intensivists, where the bundle was completed in the intensive care unit. The non-team model led by emergency physicians completed the bundle in the emergency department as part of standard care.RESULTS: Five hundred and fifty-six patients were enrolled. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 29.9%, and 67.1% of the patients had septic shock. Compliance to the bundle was 13.3, 26.9, 37.5, 45.9, 48.8 and 54.5% over the six quartiles of implementation (P < 0.01). With team model, compliance increased from 37.5% baseline to 88.2% in the sixth quartile (P < 0.01), whereas hospitals with a non-team model increased compliance from 5.2 to 39.5% (P < 0.01). Crude in-hospital mortality was better in the patients who received the entire bundle (24.5 vs. 32.7%, P = 0.04). Bundle completion was associated with crude in-hospital mortality reduction (odds ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.45-0.99), but this survival benefit disappeared after adjustment for confounding variables.CONCLUSIONS: Through education and quality improvement efforts, initially low sepsis bundle compliance was improved in Asia. A team model was more effective in achieving bundle compliance compared with a non-team model.
AB - OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of implementing sepsis bundle in multiple Asian countries, having 'team' vs. 'non-team' models of patient care.DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.SETTING: Eight urban hospitals, five countries in Asia.PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with severe sepsis or septic shock.INTERVENTIONS: Implementation was divided into six quartiles: Baseline, Education and four Quality Improvement quartiles.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quarterly bundle compliance and in-hospital mortality with respect to bundle completion and implementation model.METHODS: In the team model, the implementation was championed by intensivists, where the bundle was completed in the intensive care unit. The non-team model led by emergency physicians completed the bundle in the emergency department as part of standard care.RESULTS: Five hundred and fifty-six patients were enrolled. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 29.9%, and 67.1% of the patients had septic shock. Compliance to the bundle was 13.3, 26.9, 37.5, 45.9, 48.8 and 54.5% over the six quartiles of implementation (P < 0.01). With team model, compliance increased from 37.5% baseline to 88.2% in the sixth quartile (P < 0.01), whereas hospitals with a non-team model increased compliance from 5.2 to 39.5% (P < 0.01). Crude in-hospital mortality was better in the patients who received the entire bundle (24.5 vs. 32.7%, P = 0.04). Bundle completion was associated with crude in-hospital mortality reduction (odds ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.45-0.99), but this survival benefit disappeared after adjustment for confounding variables.CONCLUSIONS: Through education and quality improvement efforts, initially low sepsis bundle compliance was improved in Asia. A team model was more effective in achieving bundle compliance compared with a non-team model.
KW - Early goal-directed therapy
KW - Septic shock
KW - Severe sepsis
KW - Severe sepsis resuscitation bundle
KW - Length of Stay
KW - Guideline Adherence/statistics & numerical data
KW - Prospective Studies
KW - Hospital Mortality
KW - Humans
KW - Middle Aged
KW - Resuscitation/methods
KW - Male
KW - Hospitals, Urban/standards
KW - Patient Care Team/organization & administration
KW - Sepsis/mortality
KW - Time Factors
KW - Asia
KW - Female
KW - Aged
KW - Shock, Septic/mortality
KW - APACHE
KW - Practice Guidelines as Topic
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84866414812
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84866414812#tab=citedBy
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/34e8079d-67c1-3ab2-a27e-2b3cd01b48ae/
U2 - 10.1093/intqhc/mzs045
DO - 10.1093/intqhc/mzs045
M3 - Article
C2 - 22899698
SN - 1353-4505
VL - 24
SP - 452
EP - 462
JO - International Journal for Quality in Health Care
JF - International Journal for Quality in Health Care
IS - 5
M1 - mzs045
ER -