↓ Skip to main content

Recognition and treatment of severe sepsis in the emergency department: retrospective study in two French teaching hospitals

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Emergency Medicine, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Recognition and treatment of severe sepsis in the emergency department: retrospective study in two French teaching hospitals
Published in
BMC Emergency Medicine, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12873-017-0133-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philippe Le Conte, Séverin Thibergien, Jean Batiste Obellianne, Emmanuel Montassier, Gilles Potel, Pierre Marie Roy, Eric Batard

Abstract

Sepsis management in the Emergency Department remains a daily challenge. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) has released three-hour bundle. The implementation of these bundles in European Emergency Departments remains poorly described. The main objective was to assess the compliance with the Severe Sepsis Campaign 3-h bundle (blood culture, lactate dosage, first dose of antibiotics and 30 ml/kg fluid challenge). Secondary objectives were the analysis of the delay of severe sepsis recognition and description of the population. In accordance with STROBE statement, we performed a retrospective study in two French University Hospital Emergency Departments from February to August 2015. Patients admitted during the study period were screened using the electronic files of the hospital databases. Patient's files were reviewed and included in the study if they met severe sepsis criteria. Demographics, comorbities, treatments were recorded. Delays from admission to severe sepsis diagnosis, fluid loading onset and antibiotics administration were calculated. One hundred thirty patients were included (76 men, mean age 71 ± 14 years). Blood culture, lactate dosage, antibiotics and 30 ml/kg fluid loading were performed within 3 hours in % [95% confidence interval] 100% [96-100%], 62% [54-70%], 49% [41-58%] and 19% [13-27%], respectively. 25 patients out of 130 (19% [13-27%]) fulfilled each criteria of the 3-h bundle. The mean fluid loading volume was 18 ± 11 ml/kg. Mean delay between presentation and severe sepsis diagnosis was 200 ± 263 min, from diagnosis to fluid challenge and first antibiotic dose, 10 ± 27 min and 20 ± 55 min, respectively. Compliance with SSC 3-h bundle and delay between admission and sepsis recognition have to be improved. If confirmed by other studies, an improvement program might be deployed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 16 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 17 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 November 2017.
All research outputs
#15,477,045
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from BMC Emergency Medicine
#490
of 758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,997
of 315,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Emergency Medicine
#7
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 758 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,743 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.