This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Research
Sylvain Meylan
Centre hospitalier universitaire vaudois Departement de medecine
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6319-2423
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Prompt recognition and management are critical to improved outcomes. In 2019, the Lausanne University Hospital (LUH) launched a quality of care project aiming to improve sepsis management. As part of this effort, we aimed to assess sepsis awareness among nurses and physicians of the LUH and among the local paramedics.
Methods: We conducted a survey on nurses and physicians at our institution and local paramedics between January and October 2020 representing over 1,000 professionals distributed over all hospital departments. The survey assessed professionals’ knowledge of sepsis epidemiology, definition, recognition and initial evaluation (nurses and paramedics) or sepsis epidemiology, diagnosis, and management (physicians). Pediatrics and the neonatal unit were excluded.
Results: A total of 1,116 of 1,216 contacted persons among the 4417 targeted population participated and completed the survey (participation rate 91.8%). This included 619 of 2,463 (25.1%) of hospital nurses, 348 of 1,664 (20.9 %) of physicians and 149 of 290 (51.4%) of canton paramedics. Our nurse and physician sample was slightly imbalanced for sex and age. Thirteen percent of participants (28.4% of physicians, 5.9% of nurses, 6.8% of paramedics) correctly identified the Sepsis-3 consensus definition. Similarly, 48.6% of physicians and 10.0% of nurses identified the SOFA (sequential organ failure assessment) score as a sepsis defining score for infected patients. Furthermore, 24% of participants identified the Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score as a predictor of increased mortality; 6% identified correctly the components of the score. For a patient with suspected sepsis, 96.1%, 91.6% and 75.8% of physicians respectively identified blood cultures, broad-spectrum antibiotics and fluid resuscitation as required interventions; 76.4% and 18.2% of physicians requested these initial measures within 1 and 3 hours, respectively. For physicians, recent training correlated with awareness regarding definitions, SOFA score and qSOFA score use and components: ORs (95%CI) 2.2 (1.4-3.6), 4.3 (2.7-6.7), 3.4 (2.2-5.2), and 2.6 (1.5-4.6), respectively).
Conclusions: We identify a deficit of awareness among physicians, nurses and paramedics at LUH correlating with a lack of sepsis-specific training. Enhanced sepsis-specific educational efforts could significantly improve early identification and treatment of affected patients.
Keywords
Sepsis, sepsis awareness, sepsis definition, survey, management
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
History
CURRENT STATUS: Posted
Version 1
Posted 29 Oct, 2021
No community comments so far
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Critical Care & Emergency Medicine
Learn more about our company.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Research
Sylvain Meylan
Centre hospitalier universitaire vaudois Departement de medecine
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6319-2423
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
History
CURRENT STATUS: Posted
Version 1
Posted 29 Oct, 2021
No community comments so far
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Critical Care & Emergency Medicine
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Prompt recognition and management are critical to improved outcomes. In 2019, the Lausanne University Hospital (LUH) launched a quality of care project aiming to improve sepsis management. As part of this effort, we aimed to assess sepsis awareness among nurses and physicians of the LUH and among the local paramedics.
Methods: We conducted a survey on nurses and physicians at our institution and local paramedics between January and October 2020 representing over 1,000 professionals distributed over all hospital departments. The survey assessed professionals’ knowledge of sepsis epidemiology, definition, recognition and initial evaluation (nurses and paramedics) or sepsis epidemiology, diagnosis, and management (physicians). Pediatrics and the neonatal unit were excluded.
Results: A total of 1,116 of 1,216 contacted persons among the 4417 targeted population participated and completed the survey (participation rate 91.8%). This included 619 of 2,463 (25.1%) of hospital nurses, 348 of 1,664 (20.9 %) of physicians and 149 of 290 (51.4%) of canton paramedics. Our nurse and physician sample was slightly imbalanced for sex and age. Thirteen percent of participants (28.4% of physicians, 5.9% of nurses, 6.8% of paramedics) correctly identified the Sepsis-3 consensus definition. Similarly, 48.6% of physicians and 10.0% of nurses identified the SOFA (sequential organ failure assessment) score as a sepsis defining score for infected patients. Furthermore, 24% of participants identified the Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score as a predictor of increased mortality; 6% identified correctly the components of the score. For a patient with suspected sepsis, 96.1%, 91.6% and 75.8% of physicians respectively identified blood cultures, broad-spectrum antibiotics and fluid resuscitation as required interventions; 76.4% and 18.2% of physicians requested these initial measures within 1 and 3 hours, respectively. For physicians, recent training correlated with awareness regarding definitions, SOFA score and qSOFA score use and components: ORs (95%CI) 2.2 (1.4-3.6), 4.3 (2.7-6.7), 3.4 (2.2-5.2), and 2.6 (1.5-4.6), respectively).
Conclusions: We identify a deficit of awareness among physicians, nurses and paramedics at LUH correlating with a lack of sepsis-specific training. Enhanced sepsis-specific educational efforts could significantly improve early identification and treatment of affected patients.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...