Narrative Synthesis with description of factors influencing early initiation of fluid bolus in sepsis

Narrative Synthesis with description of factors influencing early initiation of fluid bolus in sepsis

Source publication
Article
Full-text available
Background: Early intravenous fluids for patients with sepsis presenting with hypoperfusion or shock in the emergency department remains one of the key recommendations of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines to reduce mortality. However, compliance with the recommendation remains poor. While several interventions have been implemented to impro...

Contexts in source publication

Context 1
... synthesise all these factors, we tabulated the data from these studies and used textual description of the identified factors. We then regrouped the factors based on whether they were found to be barriers, facilitators or factors that had no influence on the early initiation of intravenous fluid bolus in sepsis along with any additional recommendations reported in the studies (Table 2). ...
Context 2
... of these studies were conducted as retrospective chart analysis or audit. The factors identified as barriers and facilitators are summarised in Table 2. ...

Citations

... 32 Taken together with our study's findings, one may argue that quality initiatives focusing on the rapid initiation of fluids may be worthwhile and feasible. 33 However, in the example of antibiotic initiation, while findings have suggested that earlier is better, 7,34 a recent meta-analysis did not find a mortality difference when antibiotics were administered within one hour compared to three hours of sepsis onset. 35 As such, antibiotic stewards and others have warned of the potential dangers of overtreatment for undifferentiated patients. ...
Article
Full-text available
Objective Current guidelines suggest the immediate initiation of crystalloid for sepsis-induced hypoperfusion but note that supporting evidence is low quality. The aim of this study is to examine the effect of timing of fluid initiation on mortality for adults with sepsis. Data Sources Two authors independently reviewed relevant articles and extracted study details from PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and previous relevant systematic reviews from 1-1-2000 to 1-6-2022. Registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021245431) and bias assessed using CLARITY. Study Selection A minimum of severe sepsis (Sepsis-2) or sepsis (Sepsis-3) for patients ≥18 years old. Fluid initiation timing ranging from prehospital to 120 min within sepsis onset defined as “early” initiation. Data Extraction Included studies providing mortality-based odds ratios (or comparable) adjusting for confounders or prospective trials. Data Synthesis From 1643 citations, five retrospective cohort studies were included (n = 20,209) with in-hospital mortality of 21.8%. A pooled analysis (odds ratio = OR [95% CI]) did not observe an impact on mortality for the early initiation of fluids among all patients, OR = 0.79 [0.62-1.02]; heterogeneity: I ² = 86% [70-94%], but when studies analyzed cases of hypotension where available, a survival benefit was observed, OR = 0.74 [0.61-0.90]. Initiation of fluids in two prehospital studies did not impact mortality, OR = 0.82 [0.27-2.43]. However, both prehospital cohorts observed benefit among hypotensive patients individually, although heterogenous results precluded significance when pooled, OR = 0.50 [0.21-1.18]. Three hospital-based studies with initiation stratified at 30, 100, and 120 min, observed survival benefit both individually and when pooled, OR = 0.78 [0.63-0.97]. No differences were observed between prehospital versus hospital subgroups. Conclusion This meta-analysis supports the guideline recommendations for early fluid initiation once sepsis is recognized, especially in cases of hypotension. Findings are limited by the small number, heterogeneity, and retrospective nature of available studies. Further retrospective investigations may be worthwhile as randomized studies on fluid initiation are unlikely.
... Fluid administration among the suspected infection cohort of this study population has also shown mortality benefits [7]. However, adherence to these sepsis management guidelines, particularly fluid resuscitation still remains a challenge in the ED [8][9][10] warranting an exploration of the factors specifically associated with fluid administration. An understanding of these factors is essential to design and implement tailored performance improvement initiatives targeting fluid administration rather than a "one size fits" all approach. ...
... Our study has found that on average just over half of the patients presenting to the ED with sepsis received fluids which is less than optimal, and the average time to first fluids was 1.6 h. Unlike other elements of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign bundle, studies have scarcely explored factors associated with intravenous fluid administration [10]. Our study has identified a number of factors associated with initiation of intravenous fluids in patients with sepsis in the ED. ...
Article
Full-text available
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.