Evaluating Potential Missed Opportunities to Prevent, Treat, or Diagnose Sepsis: A Population-Based Retrospective Study of Insurance Claims.

Q4 Medicine
Critical care explorations Pub Date : 2025-04-02 eCollection Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1097/CCE.0000000000001240
Roger D Struble, Alan T Arakkal, Joseph E Cavanaugh, Philip M Polgreen, Aaron C Miller
{"title":"Evaluating Potential Missed Opportunities to Prevent, Treat, or Diagnose Sepsis: A Population-Based Retrospective Study of Insurance Claims.","authors":"Roger D Struble, Alan T Arakkal, Joseph E Cavanaugh, Philip M Polgreen, Aaron C Miller","doi":"10.1097/CCE.0000000000001240","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Delays in diagnosing sepsis may increase morbidity and mortality, but the frequency of delays is poorly understood.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to estimate the frequency and duration of diagnostic delays for sepsis and potential risk factors for delay.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>We conducted a retrospective case-crossover analysis of sepsis cases from 2016 to 2019 using claims from Merative MarketScan. We ascertained the index diagnosis of sepsis and corresponding hospitalization. We analyzed healthcare visits in the 180 days before diagnosis and then compared the observed and expected trends in signs or symptoms of infection, immune or organ dysfunction (e.g., fever, dyspnea) during the 14 days before diagnosis. A bootstrapping approach was used to estimate the frequency and duration of potential diagnostic delays along with possible risk-factors for experiencing a delay.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The number of patients who experienced a potential diagnostic delay, duration of delay, and number of potential missed opportunities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified a total of 649,756 cases of sepsis from 2016 to 2019 meeting inclusion criteria. There was an increase in visits with signs or symptoms of infection, immune or organ dysfunction just before the index diagnosis of sepsis. We estimated that around 16.57% (95% CI, 16.38-16.78) of patients experienced a potential diagnostic delay, with a mean delay duration of 3.21 days (95% CI, 3.13-3.27) and a median of 2 days. Most delays occurred in outpatient settings. Potential diagnostic delays were more frequent among younger age groups and patients who received antibiotics (odds ratio [OR] 2.58 [95% CI, 2.54-2.62]), or treatments for particular symptoms, including opioids (OR 1.43 [95% CI, 1.40-1.46]) and inhalers (OR 1.37 [95% CI, 1.33-1.40]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>There may be a substantial number of potential missed opportunities to diagnose sepsis, especially in outpatient settings. Multiple factors might contribute to delays in diagnosing sepsis including commonly prescribed medications for symptoms.</p>","PeriodicalId":93957,"journal":{"name":"Critical care explorations","volume":"7 4","pages":"e1240"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11968023/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care explorations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000001240","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Delays in diagnosing sepsis may increase morbidity and mortality, but the frequency of delays is poorly understood.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to estimate the frequency and duration of diagnostic delays for sepsis and potential risk factors for delay.

Design, setting, and participants: We conducted a retrospective case-crossover analysis of sepsis cases from 2016 to 2019 using claims from Merative MarketScan. We ascertained the index diagnosis of sepsis and corresponding hospitalization. We analyzed healthcare visits in the 180 days before diagnosis and then compared the observed and expected trends in signs or symptoms of infection, immune or organ dysfunction (e.g., fever, dyspnea) during the 14 days before diagnosis. A bootstrapping approach was used to estimate the frequency and duration of potential diagnostic delays along with possible risk-factors for experiencing a delay.

Main outcomes and measures: The number of patients who experienced a potential diagnostic delay, duration of delay, and number of potential missed opportunities.

Results: We identified a total of 649,756 cases of sepsis from 2016 to 2019 meeting inclusion criteria. There was an increase in visits with signs or symptoms of infection, immune or organ dysfunction just before the index diagnosis of sepsis. We estimated that around 16.57% (95% CI, 16.38-16.78) of patients experienced a potential diagnostic delay, with a mean delay duration of 3.21 days (95% CI, 3.13-3.27) and a median of 2 days. Most delays occurred in outpatient settings. Potential diagnostic delays were more frequent among younger age groups and patients who received antibiotics (odds ratio [OR] 2.58 [95% CI, 2.54-2.62]), or treatments for particular symptoms, including opioids (OR 1.43 [95% CI, 1.40-1.46]) and inhalers (OR 1.37 [95% CI, 1.33-1.40]).

Conclusions and relevance: There may be a substantial number of potential missed opportunities to diagnose sepsis, especially in outpatient settings. Multiple factors might contribute to delays in diagnosing sepsis including commonly prescribed medications for symptoms.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信