Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Severe sepsis and septic shock in pre-hospital emergency medicine: survey results of medical directors of emergency medical services concerning antibiotics, blood cultures and algorithms

  • EM - ORIGINAL
  • Published:
Internal and Emergency Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Delayed antibiotic treatment for patients in severe sepsis and septic shock decreases the probability of survival. In this survey, medical directors of different emergency medical services (EMS) in Germany were asked if they are prepared for pre-hospital sepsis therapy with antibiotics or special algorithms to evaluate the individual preparations of the different rescue areas for the treatment of patients with this infectious disease. The objective of the survey was to obtain a general picture of the current status of the EMS with respect to rapid antibiotic treatment for sepsis. A total of 166 medical directors were invited to complete a short survey on behalf of the different rescue service districts in Germany via an electronic cover letter. Of the rescue districts, 25.6 % (n = 20) stated that they keep antibiotics on EMS vehicles. In addition, 2.6 % carry blood cultures on the vehicles. The most common antibiotic is ceftriaxone (third generation cephalosporin). In total, 8 (10.3 %) rescue districts use an algorithm for patients with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock. Although the German EMS is an emergency physician-based rescue system, special opportunities in the form of antibiotics on emergency physician vehicles are missing. Simultaneously, only 10.3 % of the rescue districts use a special algorithm for sepsis therapy. Sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock do not appear to be prioritized as highly as these deadly diseases should be in the pre-hospital setting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig.1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Engel C, Brunkhorst FM, Bone H-G et al (2007) Epidemiology of sepsis in Germany: results from a national prospective multicenter study. Intensive Care Med 33:606–618. doi:10.1007/s00134-006-0517-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, Lidicker J et al (2001) Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcome, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med 29:1303–1310. doi:10.1097/00003246-200107000-00002

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Padkin A, Goldfrad C, Brady AR et al (2003) Epidemiology of severe sepsis occurring in the first 24 hrs in intensive care units in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Crit Care Med 31:2332–2338. doi:10.1097/01.CCM.0000085141.75513.2B

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Perner A (2013) Hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.42 versus Ringer’s acetate in severe sepsis 1A02, 2C04. J Intensive Care Soc 14:82–83. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1204242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Holst LB, Haase N, Wetterslev J et al (2014) Lower versus higher hemoglobin threshold for transfusion in septic shock. N Engl J Med 371:1381–1391. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1406617

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gottlieb M, Bailitz J (2015) Comparison of early goal-directed therapy with usual care for severe sepsis and septic shock. Ann Emerg Med. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.05.025

    Google Scholar 

  7. ProCess Investigators, Yealy DM, Kellum JA et al (2014) A randomized trial of protocol-based care for early septic shock. N Engl J Med 370:1683–1693. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1401602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Oppert M (2012) Effect of empirical treatment with moxifloxacin and meropenem vs meropenem on sepsis-related organ dysfunction in patients. JAMA J Am Med Assoc. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.5833

    Google Scholar 

  9. Herlitz J, Bång A, Wireklint-Sundström B et al (2012) Suspicion and treatment of severe sepsis. An overview of the prehospital chain of care. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 20:42. doi:10.1186/1757-7241-20-42

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Bayer O, Schwarzkopf D, Stumme C et al (2015) An early warning scoring system to identify septic patients in the prehospital setting: the PRESEP Score. Acad Emerg Med 22:868–871. doi:10.1111/acem.12707

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Báez AA, Hanudel P, Perez MT et al (2013) Prehospital sepsis project (PSP): knowledge and attitudes of United States advanced out-of-hospital care providers. Prehosp Disaster Med 28:104–106. doi:10.1017/S1049023X12001744

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Polito CC, Isakov A, Yancey AH et al (2015) Prehospital recognition of severe sepsis: development and validation of a novel emergency medical services screening tool. Am J Emerg Med. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2015.04.024

    Google Scholar 

  13. Guerra WF, Mayfield TR, Meyers MS et al (2013) Early detection and treatment of patients with severe sepsis by prehospital personnel. J Emerg Med 44:1116–1125. doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2012.11.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Donnino MW, Fisher J (2006) Determining disease severity in severe sepsis and septic shock. Intern Emerg Med 1:219–220

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Çildir E, Bulut M, Akalin H et al (2013) Evaluation of the modified MEDS, MEWS score and Charlson comorbidity index in patients with community acquired sepsis in the emergency department. Intern Emerg Med 8:255–260. doi:10.1007/s11739-012-0890-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Jon Femling PhDMD, Steven Weiss MD, Eric Hauswald BA, David Tarby MD (2014) EMS patients and walk-in patients presenting with severe sepsis: differences in management and outcome. South Med J 107:751–756. doi:10.14423/SMJ.0000000000000206

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Studnek JR, Artho MR, Garner CL, Jones AE (2012) The impact of emergency medical services on the ED care of severe sepsis. Am J Emerg Med 30:51–56. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2010.09.015

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Gaieski DF, Mikkelsen ME, Band RA et al (2010) Impact of time to antibiotics on survival in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock in whom early goal-directed therapy was initiated in the emergency department. Crit Care Med 38:1045–1053. doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181cc4824

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE et al (2006) Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med 34:1589–1596. doi:10.1097/01.CCM.0000217961.75225.E9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Peters O, Runggaldier K, Schlechtriemen T (2007) Algorithms in emergency medicine. Notfall+Rettungsmedizin 10:229–236. doi:10.1007/s10049-006-0886-z

  21. German Association of Emergency Technician (DBRD) (2015) Algorithms for implementation of the pyramid process an part of the NotSanG-Legislation

  22. The Federal Institute for Research on Building UA and SD (BBSR) Siedlungsstrukturelle Kreistypen. http://www.bbsr.bund.de/BBSR/DE/Raumbeobachtung/Raumabgrenzungen/Kreistypen4/kreistypen.html;jsessionid=FBB8E18A06F8580D635F20D0DA65F77E.live1042?nn=443222

  23. Theobald A, Dreyer M, Starsetzki T (2003) Online Marktforschung. Wiesbaden. doi:10.1007/978-3-663-10948-8

    Google Scholar 

  24. Joos S, Roos M, Ledig T et al (2011) Perspectives and experiences of vocational trainers in general practice. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 105:97–104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Neugebauer E, Sauerland S, Keck V et al (2003) Leitlinien Akutschmerztherapie und ihre Umsetzung in der Chirurgie—Eine deutschlandweite Kliniksumfrage. Der Chir 74:235–238

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Meuser T, Grond S, Lynch J et al (1997) Stand der Analgesie und Anästhesie in der Geburtshilfe—Eine Umfrage aus Nordrhein. Anaesthesist 46:532–535

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Geyer BC, H.Kaji A, Katz ED, et al. (2015) A national evaluation of the scholary acitivity requirement in residency programs. Acad Emerg Med 22:1337–44

  28. Doty CI, Roppolo LP, Asher S et al (2015) How do emergency medicine programs structure their clinical competency committees. Acad Emerg Med 22:1351–1354

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Vogel F et al (2010) Empfehlungen zur kalkulierten parenteralen Initialtherapie bakterieller Erkrankungen bei Erwachsenen. Chemother J 19:179–255

    Google Scholar 

  30. Wrede CE, Reinhart K (2014) Sepsis in emergency medicine. Notfall + Rettungsmedizin 17:707–717. doi:10.1007/s10049-014-1962-4

  31. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A et al (2013) Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012. Intensive Care Med 39:165–228. doi:10.1007/s00134-012-2769-8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Harrison DA, Sadique MZ et al (2015) Trial of early, goal-directed resuscitation for septic shock. 1–11. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1500896

  33. Bailey M, Bellomo R, Peter A et al (2014) Goal-directed resuscitation for patients with early septic shock. N Engl J Med. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1404380

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Bossi IE, Rusconi AM, Lampard G, Szava-Kovats M (2015) Is there a benefit for a care protocol in the treatment of septic shock? Intern Emerg Med 10:83–85. doi:10.1007/s11739-014-1151-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Investigators TP (2014) A randomized trial of protocol-based care for early septic shock. Process trial. N Engl J Med 370:1–11. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1401602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kaukonen, Kirsi-Maija; Bailey, Michael; Pilcher, David; Cooper, D Jamie; Bellomo R (2015) Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Criteria in Defining Severe Sepsis. N Engl J Med 372:1629–1638. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1415236

  37. Marik PE (2015) The demise of early goal-directed therapy for severe sepsis and septic shock. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. doi:10.1111/aas.12479

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Critical and Emergency Care, Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Management, Hospital of Main-Taunus-District, Teaching Hospital of J.-W. Goethe University Medical School, Kronberger Str. 36, 65812, Bad Soden, Germany

    Sebastian Casu

  2. Faculty of Medicine, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, Geissweg 5, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany

    David Häske

Authors
  1. Sebastian Casu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Häske
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastian Casu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There are no actual or potential conflicts of interest capable of influencing the judgment of any author.

Funding

This investigation got no funding.

Statement of human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study formal consent is not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Casu, S., Häske, D. Severe sepsis and septic shock in pre-hospital emergency medicine: survey results of medical directors of emergency medical services concerning antibiotics, blood cultures and algorithms. Intern Emerg Med 11, 571–576 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-015-1371-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-015-1371-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation