Epidemiology of Community-Acquired Versus Hospital-Acquired Sepsis in Acute Hospitals in Ireland, 2016-2022.

IF 2.7 Q4 Medicine
Critical care explorations Pub Date : 2025-07-15 eCollection Date: 2025-07-01 DOI:10.1097/CCE.0000000000001289
Emer M Liddy, Doaa K Amin, Declan J McKeown, Michael J O'Dwyer, Akke Vellinga
{"title":"Epidemiology of Community-Acquired Versus Hospital-Acquired Sepsis in Acute Hospitals in Ireland, 2016-2022.","authors":"Emer M Liddy, Doaa K Amin, Declan J McKeown, Michael J O'Dwyer, Akke Vellinga","doi":"10.1097/CCE.0000000000001289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Understanding sepsis epidemiology is crucial to enable clinicians to identify patients at highest risk of developing and dying from sepsis.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>While community-acquired (CA) sepsis has been identified as more common than hospital-acquired (HA) sepsis, HA sepsis has led to increased morbidity and mortality. Few studies, however, have analyzed CA and HA sepsis by site of infection or by patient comorbidities. The aim of this analysis was to describe the epidemiology of patients with CA and HA sepsis diagnosed in Ireland.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This was a retrospective cohort study. The setting was all Irish acute public hospitals from 2016 to 2022. Data were extracted from the Hospital In-Patient Enquiry (HIPE) system recording all discharges from acute public hospitals, if a sepsis-related diagnostic code was included.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Univariate and multivariate analysis was conducted to compare CA and HA sepsis events and their association with sepsis-associated mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of CA vs. HA sepsis events in the database was 86,011 (85.2%) vs. 14,930 (14.8%). HA sepsis patients were 1.5 times more likely to die in hospital compared with CA. Of diagnoses analyzed, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified as the strongest risk factor predictive of mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 2.4) followed by cardiac disease (OR, 1.9) and influenza or pneumonia (OR, 1.9). Sepsis patients with a lower socioeconomic status had a 20% higher likelihood of death.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>This analysis highlighted a significant increased risk of sepsis-associated mortality for patients diagnosed with sepsis as a result of a HA infection and key infection types and comorbidities including SARS-CoV-2, influenza or pneumonia, cancer, and cardiac disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":93957,"journal":{"name":"Critical care explorations","volume":"7 7","pages":"e1289"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12266915/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care explorations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000001289","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Understanding sepsis epidemiology is crucial to enable clinicians to identify patients at highest risk of developing and dying from sepsis.

Objectives: While community-acquired (CA) sepsis has been identified as more common than hospital-acquired (HA) sepsis, HA sepsis has led to increased morbidity and mortality. Few studies, however, have analyzed CA and HA sepsis by site of infection or by patient comorbidities. The aim of this analysis was to describe the epidemiology of patients with CA and HA sepsis diagnosed in Ireland.

Design, setting, and participants: This was a retrospective cohort study. The setting was all Irish acute public hospitals from 2016 to 2022. Data were extracted from the Hospital In-Patient Enquiry (HIPE) system recording all discharges from acute public hospitals, if a sepsis-related diagnostic code was included.

Main outcomes and measures: Univariate and multivariate analysis was conducted to compare CA and HA sepsis events and their association with sepsis-associated mortality.

Results: The number of CA vs. HA sepsis events in the database was 86,011 (85.2%) vs. 14,930 (14.8%). HA sepsis patients were 1.5 times more likely to die in hospital compared with CA. Of diagnoses analyzed, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified as the strongest risk factor predictive of mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 2.4) followed by cardiac disease (OR, 1.9) and influenza or pneumonia (OR, 1.9). Sepsis patients with a lower socioeconomic status had a 20% higher likelihood of death.

Conclusions and relevance: This analysis highlighted a significant increased risk of sepsis-associated mortality for patients diagnosed with sepsis as a result of a HA infection and key infection types and comorbidities including SARS-CoV-2, influenza or pneumonia, cancer, and cardiac disease.

2016-2022年爱尔兰急性医院社区获得性与医院获得性败血症的流行病学
重要性:败血症是发病率和死亡率的主要原因。了解脓毒症的流行病学是至关重要的,使临床医生能够识别患者的最高风险发展和死于脓毒症。目的:虽然社区获得性(CA)脓毒症比医院获得性(HA)脓毒症更常见,但HA脓毒症导致发病率和死亡率增加。然而,很少有研究根据感染部位或患者合并症来分析CA和HA败血症。本分析的目的是描述爱尔兰确诊的CA和HA败血症患者的流行病学。设计、环境和参与者:这是一项回顾性队列研究。研究背景是2016年至2022年期间所有爱尔兰急性公立医院。数据提取自医院住院病人查询(HIPE)系统,记录了所有急性公立医院的出院情况,如果包括败血症相关的诊断代码。主要结局和措施:进行单因素和多因素分析,比较CA和HA脓毒症事件及其与脓毒症相关死亡率的关系。结果:数据库中CA和HA脓毒症事件的数量分别为86011例(85.2%)和14930例(14.8%)。HA败血症患者在医院死亡的可能性是CA的1.5倍。在分析的诊断中,严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2 (SARS-CoV-2)被确定为预测死亡率的最强危险因素(优势比[OR] = 2.4),其次是心脏病(OR, 1.9)和流感或肺炎(OR, 1.9)。社会经济地位较低的败血症患者死亡的可能性高出20%。结论和相关性:该分析强调,由于HA感染和主要感染类型和合并症(包括SARS-CoV-2、流感或肺炎、癌症和心脏病),诊断为败血症的患者败血症相关死亡率风险显著增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信