Impact of an electronic alert system for pediatric sepsis screening a tertiary hospital experience.

Autor: Alturki A; Department of Pediatrics, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. aturki@kfshrc.edu.sa., Al-Eyadhy A; Department of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia., Alfayez A; Maternity and Children's Hospital, Alhasa, Saudi Arabia., Bendahmash A; Department of Pediatrics, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia., Aljofan F; Department of Pediatrics, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia., Alanzi F; Department of Pediatrics, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia., Alsubaie H; Department of Pediatrics, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia., Alabdulsalam M; Department of Pediatrics, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia., Alayed T; Department of Pediatrics, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia., Alofisan T; Department of Pediatrics, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia., Alnajem A; Research Center, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Scientific reports [Sci Rep] 2022 Jul 20; Vol. 12 (1), pp. 12436. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Jul 20.
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-16632-2
Abstrakt: This study aimed to assess the potential impact of implementing an electronic alert system (EAS) for systemic inflammatory syndrome (SIRS) and sepsis in pediatric patients mortality. This retrospective study had a pre and post design. We enrolled patients aged ≤ 14 years who were diagnosed with sepsis/severe sepsis upon admission to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of our tertiary hospital from January 2014 to December 2018. We implemented an EAS for the patients with SIRS/sepsis. The patients who met the inclusion criteria pre-EAS implementation comprised the control group, and the group post-EAS implementation was the experimental group. Mortality was the primary outcome, while length of stay (LOS) and mechanical ventilation in the first hour were the secondary outcomes. Of the 308 enrolled patients, 147 were in the pre-EAS group and 161 in the post-EAS group. In terms of mortality, 44 patients in the pre-EAS group and 28 in the post-EAS group died (p 0.011). The average LOS in the PICU was 7.9 days for the pre-EAS group and 6.8 days for the post-EAS group (p 0.442). Considering the EAS initiation time as the "zero time", early recognition of SIRS and sepsis via the EAS led to faster treatment interventions in post-EAS group, which included fluid boluses with median (25th, 75th percentile) time of 107 (37, 218) min vs. 30 (11,112) min, p < 0.001) and time to initiate antimicrobial therapy median (25th, 75th percentile) of 170.5 (66,320) min vs. 131 (53,279) min, p 0.042). The difference in mechanical ventilation in the first hour of admission was not significant between the groups (25.17% vs. 24.22%, p 0.895). The implementation of the EAS resulted in a statistically significant reduction in the mortality rate among the patients admitted to the PICU in our study. An EAS can play an important role in saving lives and subsequent reduction in healthcare costs. Further enhancement of systematic screening is therefore highly recommended to improve the prognosis of pediatric SIRS and sepsis. The implementation of the EAS, warrants further validation in multicenter or national studies.
(© 2022. The Author(s).)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje