» Articles » PMID: 35659554

Identifying Factors Associated with Intravenous Fluid Administration in Patients with Sepsis Presenting to the Emergency Department: a Retrospective Cohort Study

Overview
Journal BMC Emerg Med
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Emergency Medicine
Date 2022 Jun 6
PMID 35659554
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Appropriate and timely administration of intravenous fluids to patients with sepsis-induced hypotension is one of the mainstays of sepsis management in the emergency department (ED), however, fluid resuscitation remains an ongoing challenge in ED. Our study has been undertaken with two specific aims: firstly, for patients with sepsis, to identify factors associated with receiving intravenous fluids while in the ED; and, secondly to identify determinants associated with the actual time to fluid administration.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective multicentre cohort study of adult ED presentations between October 2018 and May 2019 in four metropolitan hospitals in Western Sydney, Australia. Patients meeting pre-specified criteria for sepsis and septic shock and treated with antibiotics within the first 24 h of presentation were included. Multivariable models were used to identify factors associated with fluid administration in sepsis.

Results: Four thousand one hundred forty-six patients met the inclusion criteria, among these 2,300 (55.5%) patients with sepsis received intravenous fluids in ED. The median time to fluid administration from the time of diagnosis of sepsis was 1.6 h (Interquartile Range (IQR) 0.5 to 3.8), and the median volume of fluids administered was 1,100 mL (IQR 750 to 2058). Factors associated with patients receiving fluids were younger age (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% Confidence Interval (CI (1.03 to 1.07), p < 0.001); lower systolic blood pressure (OR 1.11, 95% CI (1.08 to 1.13), p < 0.001); presenting to smaller hospital (OR 1.48, 95% CI (1.25 to 1.75, p < 0.001) and a Clinical Rapid Response alert activated (OR 1.64, 95% CI (1.28 to 2.11), p < 0.001). Patients with Triage Category 1 received fluids 101.22 min earlier (95% CI (59.3 to131.2), p < 0.001) and those with Category 2 received fluids 43.58 min earlier (95% CI (9.6 to 63.1), p < 0.001) compared to patients with Triage Category 3-5. Other factors associated with receiving fluids earlier included septic shock (-49.37 min (95% CI (-86.4 to -12.4), p < 0.001)); each mmol/L increase in serum lactate levels (-9.0 min, 95% CI (-15.7 to -2.3), p < 0.001) and presenting to smaller hospitals (-74.61 min, 95% CI (-94.0 to -55.3), p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Younger age, greater severity of sepsis, and presenting to a smaller hospital increased the probability of receiving fluids and receiving it earlier. Recognition of these factors may assist in effective implementation of sepsis management guidelines which should translate into better patient outcomes. Future studies are needed to identify other associated factors that we have not explored.

Citing Articles

Hemodynamic Resuscitation Characteristics of Emergency Department Patients with Sepsis and Hypotension who are and are not Admitted to ICU; a Prospective Cross-sectional Study.

Vella R, Jones P, Keijzers G Arch Acad Emerg Med. 2024; 12(1):e53.

PMID: 39290770 PMC: 11407533. DOI: 10.22037/aaem.v12i1.2337.


Association between trauma triage and time-to-vaso-occlusive events in patients with sickle cell disease after traumatic injury: a retrospective study.

Parchuri E, Pacella-LaBarbara M, OBrien J, Gruen D, Guyette F, Brown J Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2023; 8(1):e001200.

PMID: 38020866 PMC: 10668288. DOI: 10.1136/tsaco-2023-001200.


Facilitators and barriers of appropriate and timely initiation of intravenous fluids in patients with sepsis in emergency departments: a consensus development Delphi study.

Kabil G, Frost S, Hatcher D, Shetty A, Mcnally S BMC Nurs. 2023; 22(1):402.

PMID: 37891553 PMC: 10604401. DOI: 10.1186/s12912-023-01561-w.


Administration of Intravenous Furosemide in Patients with Acute Infection: Patient Characteristics and Impact on In-Hospital Outcome.

Levi N, Bnaya A, Wolak A, Shavit L, Jaffal S, Amsalem I J Clin Med. 2023; 12(10).

PMID: 37240603 PMC: 10218796. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12103496.


Effect of Out-Of-Hour Admission on Fluid Treatment of Emergency Department Patients with Suspected Infection; a Multicenter Post-Hoc Analysis.

Jessen M, Drescher Petersen A, Kirkegaard H Arch Acad Emerg Med. 2023; 11(1):e21.

PMID: 36919142 PMC: 10008217. DOI: 10.22037/aaem.v11i1.1839.

References
1.
Mouncey P, Osborn T, Sarah Power G, Harrison D, Zia Sadique M, Grieve R . Protocolised Management In Sepsis (ProMISe): a multicentre randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early, goal-directed, protocolised resuscitation for emerging septic shock. Health Technol Assess. 2015; 19(97):i-xxv, 1-150. PMC: 4781482. DOI: 10.3310/hta19970. View

2.
Kabil G, Liang S, Delaney A, Macdonald S, Thompson K, Saavedra A . Association between intravenous fluid resuscitation and outcome among patients with suspected infection and sepsis: A retrospective cohort study. Emerg Med Australas. 2021; 34(3):361-369. DOI: 10.1111/1742-6723.13893. View

3.
Deis A, Whiles B, Brown A, Satterwhite C, Simpson S . Three-Hour Bundle Compliance and Outcomes in Patients With Undiagnosed Severe Sepsis. Chest. 2017; 153(1):39-45. PMC: 6689078. DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2017.09.031. View

4.
Hayden G, Tuuri R, Scott R, Losek J, Blackshaw A, Schoenling A . Triage sepsis alert and sepsis protocol lower times to fluids and antibiotics in the ED. Am J Emerg Med. 2015; 34(1):1-9. PMC: 4905767. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2015.08.039. View

5.
Charlson M, Pompei P, Ales K, MacKenzie C . A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987; 40(5):373-83. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8. View