Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Nunnally, Mark E.
• Ferrer, Ricard
• Martin, Greg S.
• Martin-Loeches, Ignacio
• Machado, Flavia R.
• De Backer, Daniel
• Coopersmith, Craig M.
• Deutschman, Clifford S.

Titel

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: research priorities for the administration, epidemiology, scoring and identification of sepsis

Ist Teil von

• Intensive care medicine experimental, 2021-07, Vol.9 (1), p.34-34, Article 34

Ort / Verlag

Cham: Springer International Publishing

Erscheinungsjahr

2021

Quelle

Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Objective To identify priorities for administrative, epidemiologic and diagnostic research in sepsis. Design As a follow-up to a previous consensus statement about sepsis research, members of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Research Committee, representing the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Society of Critical Care Medicine addressed six questions regarding care delivery, epidemiology, organ dysfunction, screening, identification of septic shock, and information that can predict outcomes in sepsis. Methods Six questions from the Scoring/Identification and Administration sections of the original Research Priorities publication were explored in greater detail to better examine the knowledge gaps and rationales for questions that were previously identified through a consensus process. Results The document provides a framework for priorities in research to address the following questions: (1) What is the optimal model of delivering sepsis care?; (2) What is the epidemiology of sepsis susceptibility and response to treatment?; (3) What information identifies organ dysfunction?; (4) How can we screen for sepsis in various settings?; (5) How do we identify septic shock?; and (6) What in-hospital clinical information is associated with important outcomes in patients with sepsis? Conclusions There is substantial knowledge of sepsis epidemiology and ways to identify and treat sepsis patients, but many gaps remain. Areas of uncertainty identified in this manuscript can help prioritize initiatives to improve an understanding of individual patient and demographic heterogeneity with sepsis and septic shock, biomarkers and accurate patient identification, organ dysfunction, and ways to improve sepsis care.