↓ Skip to main content

Mortality trends in U.S. adults with septic shock, 2005-2011: a serial cross-sectional analysis of nationally-representative data

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Mortality trends in U.S. adults with septic shock, 2005-2011: a serial cross-sectional analysis of nationally-representative data
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-1620-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tadahiro Goto, Kazuki Yoshida, Yusuke Tsugawa, Michael R. Filbin, Carlos A. Camargo, Kohei Hasegawa

Abstract

We aimed to investigate mortality trends in hospitalized patients with septic shock in the US. To achieve this objective, we tested hypothesis that mortality decreased in patients identified by the code of septic shock while mortality did not change in those with septic shock identified by vasopressor use. We conducted a serial cross-sectional analysis using Nationwide Inpatient Sample database from 2005 through 2011. First, we identified all adult patients aged ≥18 years hospitalized for septic shock by the following criteria: 1) primary ICD-9 diagnosis of infection plus procedure code for vasopressor use, 2) primary ICD-9 diagnosis of infection plus septic shock in non-primary field, and 3) primary ICD-9 diagnosis of septic shock. Second, we stratified all identified patients by record of vasopressor use. The outcome of interest was year-to-year changes in the in-hospital all-cause mortality. From 2005 to 2011, we identified 109,812 weighted hospitalizations with septic shock. Overall, there was a significant downward trend in in-hospital mortality (from 46 % in 2005 to 42 % in 2011; P trend  = 0.003); the adjusted mortality also decreased significantly (OR for comparison of 2005 with 2011, 0.98; 95 % CI, 0.96-1.00; P < 0.001). In stratified analysis, the mortality trend was not significant in the subgroup with vasopressor use (from 42 % in 2005 to 40 % in 2011; P trend =0.57); similarly, the adjusted mortality did not change significantly (OR, 1.01; 95 % CI, 0.97-1.05; P =0.62). By contrast, there was a downward trend in mortality in the subgroup without vasopressor use (from 47 % in 2005 to 43 % in 2011; P trend =0.002); likewise, the adjusted mortality decreased significantly (OR, 0.97; 95 % CI, 0.95-0.99; P =0.002) CONCLUSIONS: From 2005 to 2011, we found a modest decrease in in-hospital mortality among patients identified with septic shock. However, in the subgroup with vasopressor use, we found no significant change in mortality. Our data challenge the conventional wisdom that mortality in this population has improved during the last decade.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 39 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 54%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 7 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 06 July 2016.
All research outputs
#6,590,084
of 23,313,051 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#2,077
of 7,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,199
of 354,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#39
of 165 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,313,051 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,804 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
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 354,281 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 165 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.