Early recognition of sepsis in the emergency department
Download
1 / 25

EARLY RECOGNITION OF SEPSIS IN THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 759 Views
  • Uploaded on

EARLY RECOGNITION OF SEPSIS IN THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT. Nanette Kent RN, BSN Senior Specialist Emergency Department, EBPI Fellow Tonia McCoy, RN MSN, Senior Specialist Emergency Department, EBPI Mentor. Sharp Grossmont Hospital.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'EARLY RECOGNITION OF SEPSIS IN THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT' - avian


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Early recognition of sepsis in the emergency department l.jpg

EARLY RECOGNITION OF SEPSIS IN THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT

Nanette Kent RN, BSN Senior Specialist Emergency Department, EBPI Fellow

Tonia McCoy, RN MSN, Senior Specialist Emergency Department, EBPI Mentor


Sharp grossmont hospital l.jpg
Sharp Grossmont Hospital

  • The largest and most comprehensive health-care facility in East San Diego County

  • Covering 750 square miles.

  • Currently licensed for 446 bed

    • Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award

    • Magnet designated

  • Busiest ED in San Diego County

    • 80,000 patients per year

    • Average 225 patients per day


Pico question l.jpg
PICO Question:

In the Emergency Department, does the implementation of an assessment tool for identifying sepsis patients, with the utilization of SBAR communication, when compared to the current practice of following the Sepsis Early Recognition Algorithm for Goal Directed Therapy increase early recognition of sepsis?


Sepsis l.jpg
Sepsis

  • Severe sepsis

    • Acute organ dysfunction secondary to infection

  • Septic Shock

    • Severe sepsis plus hypotension not reversed with fluid resuscitation

    • 25 % mortality


Surviving sepsis campaign l.jpg
Surviving Sepsis Campaign

  • Initiated in 2003 by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine, the International Sepsis Forum, and the Society of Critical Care Medicine.

  • Critical care and Infections Disease experts representing 11 international organizations.

  • Developed guidelines that would be of practical use for the bedside clinician.


Surviving sepsis campaign6 l.jpg
Surviving Sepsis Campaign

  • Sepsis is a major cause of mortality, killing approximately 1,400 people worldwide every day, Surviving Sepsis Campaign (2008).

  • In the Emergency Department at SGH, the algorithm for Early Goal Directed Therapy for Sepsis has not been consistently instituted.



Slide8 l.jpg

Sharp Grossmont Hospital

Sepsis Algorithm


Ebp objectives l.jpg
EBP OBJECTIVES

To utilize a screening tool that will lead to increased recognition and early treatment of sepsis in the Emergency Department.


Methods l.jpg
METHODS

  • Staff were educated in the utilization of the sepsis screening tool.

  • Staff were given additional education in the current sepsis algorithm.

  • The tool screened for:

    • SIRS (Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome)

    • Infection

    • Organ Dysfunction

    • Severe Sepsis


Slide11 l.jpg

Sharp Grossmont Hospital

RevisedSepsis Screening Tool


Methods12 l.jpg
METHODS

  • First section screens for SIRS

    • SIRS includes objective vital signs data:

      • Temperature ≥ 100.4 or ≤ 96.8 F

      • Heart Rate ≥ 90

      • Respiratory Rate ≥ 20

      • WBC count ≥ 12,000 or ≤ 4,000, or greater than 0.5K/uL bands

    • If the patient has 2 or more of the above, they screen positive for SIRS


Methods13 l.jpg
METHODS

  • Second section screens for infection

    • The patient is screened for infection if they have SIRS

      • Does the patient have suspected or documented infection?

      • Has the patient received antibiotics (not prophylaxis)?

    • If one of the above is confirmed, the patient is screened for organ dysfunction


Methods14 l.jpg
METHODS

  • Third section screens for Organ Dysfunction

    • Respiratory: SaO2 < 90 %

    • Cardiovascular: SBP < 90

    • Renal: urine output < 0.5ml/hr; creatinine increase > 0.5mg/dl from baseline

    • CNS: altered LOC, Glascow coma scale ≤ 5

  • Any one of the above, in addition to positive results from sections 1 and 2, indicates severe sepsis.


  • Methods15 l.jpg
    METHODS

    The RN then approaches the ERMD, informing him using SBAR technique, that the patient has screened positive for severe sepsis.


    Sbar communication technique l.jpg
    SBAR Communication Technique

    • Situation:

      • Screened positive for severe sepsis

    • Background:

      • Positive for SIRS (describe)

      • Known or suspected infection

      • Organ dysfunction (describe)

    • Assessment:

      • Share complete VS and SaO2


    Sbar communication technique17 l.jpg
    SBAR Communication Technique

    • Recommendation:

      • I need you to come and evaluate the patient to confirm if they have severe sepsis.

      • It is recommended that I get an ABG, lactate, and CBC, Can I proceed and get these?

      • Any other labs you would like me to obtain?

      • If the pt is hypotensive: Can I start an IV and give a bolus of NS – 20 ml/kg?


    Initial data collection l.jpg

    Baseline data - Concurrent audits of 200 patients were completed utilizing the screening tool.

    Random audits on Emergency Department patients were performed.

    Initial Data Collection


    Results l.jpg
    Results completed utilizing the screening tool.

    N = 200


    Post implementation data collection l.jpg

    Staff utilized the screening tool on all patients, regardless of chief complaint or presentation.

    A total of 206 patients were screened.

    Post Implementation Data Collection


    Results21 l.jpg
    Results regardless of chief complaint or presentation.

    N = 206

    N = 206


    Results22 l.jpg
    Results regardless of chief complaint or presentation.

    N = 206


    Conclusion l.jpg

    Baseline data regardless of chief complaint or presentation.

    Three patients qualified for complete utilization of the screening tool.

    Post education

    Five patients screened positive for utilization of the screening tool.

    Four received additional treatment

    There is a two-times greater chance of receiving appropriate treatment for sepsis with utilization of the sepsis screening tool.

    Conclusion


    Next step l.jpg

    Incorporation of the screening tool into EMSTAT electronic charting.

    Utilization of the tool during the triage assessment.

    Possibility of implementation of a " sepsis code " when patients present with SIRS symptoms at triage.

    Next Step


    Questions l.jpg

    Questions…? charting.

    Thank you


    ad