A systematic review of the cost-impact of sepsis care bundles.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Elyse Ladbrook, Stephane Bouchoucha, Jo McDonall, Anastasia F Hutchinson
{"title":"A systematic review of the cost-impact of sepsis care bundles.","authors":"Elyse Ladbrook, Stephane Bouchoucha, Jo McDonall, Anastasia F Hutchinson","doi":"10.1016/j.jhin.2025.08.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The use of evidence-based sepsis bundles to minimise variation in clinical management of sepsis, improve health outcomes, and associated costs, is well supported in current literature, particularly within high-acuity acute care settings. However, there is limited research evaluating sepsis bundle implementation in subacute, residential aged care facilities (RACF) and broader acute care environments. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate studies reporting financial outcomes associated with use/implementation of sepsis care bundles across acute and subacute healthcare organisations, and RACF. Electronic searches of the Cochrane database, as well as CINAHL Complete and MEDLINE Complete (via the EBSCOHost platform) were conducted between January 2000 to July 2025. Studies were screened and evaluated by two independent researchers. Twelve studies were identified for inclusion, of these 58.33% (n = 7) utilised an established economic evaluation methodology and five studies (41.67%) outlined the cost impact of sepsis bundle implementation. Results highlighted heterogeneity in reported cost outcomes, sepsis definitions, with limited patient level data and evaluation. Despite heterogeneity of findings, the results of this review indicate clinical and economic effectiveness associated with sepsis bundle implementation in the acute care setting. Sepsis bundle implementation was associated with decreased hospital and/or patient costs in 66.7% of studies. Further research is required to evaluate the economic impact of sepsis bundles beyond the acute care environment, including subacute and RACF, in paediatric and adult populations. In addition, greater attention towards cross-jurisdictional standardisation of cost-impact evaluation methods is needed to facilitate performance benchmarking and meta-analysis of outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":54806,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hospital Infection","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hospital Infection","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2025.08.006","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of evidence-based sepsis bundles to minimise variation in clinical management of sepsis, improve health outcomes, and associated costs, is well supported in current literature, particularly within high-acuity acute care settings. However, there is limited research evaluating sepsis bundle implementation in subacute, residential aged care facilities (RACF) and broader acute care environments. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate studies reporting financial outcomes associated with use/implementation of sepsis care bundles across acute and subacute healthcare organisations, and RACF. Electronic searches of the Cochrane database, as well as CINAHL Complete and MEDLINE Complete (via the EBSCOHost platform) were conducted between January 2000 to July 2025. Studies were screened and evaluated by two independent researchers. Twelve studies were identified for inclusion, of these 58.33% (n = 7) utilised an established economic evaluation methodology and five studies (41.67%) outlined the cost impact of sepsis bundle implementation. Results highlighted heterogeneity in reported cost outcomes, sepsis definitions, with limited patient level data and evaluation. Despite heterogeneity of findings, the results of this review indicate clinical and economic effectiveness associated with sepsis bundle implementation in the acute care setting. Sepsis bundle implementation was associated with decreased hospital and/or patient costs in 66.7% of studies. Further research is required to evaluate the economic impact of sepsis bundles beyond the acute care environment, including subacute and RACF, in paediatric and adult populations. In addition, greater attention towards cross-jurisdictional standardisation of cost-impact evaluation methods is needed to facilitate performance benchmarking and meta-analysis of outcomes.

败血症护理包成本影响的系统回顾。
使用循证脓毒症治疗包,以尽量减少脓毒症临床管理的变化,改善健康结果和相关成本,在目前的文献中得到很好的支持,特别是在高急性急性护理环境中。然而,评估脓毒症捆绑治疗在亚急性、住宅老年护理设施(RACF)和更广泛的急性护理环境中的实施的研究有限。本系统综述的目的是评估报告在急性和亚急性医疗机构和RACF中使用/实施脓毒症护理包相关的财务结果的研究。在2000年1月至2025年7月期间,对Cochrane数据库以及CINAHL Complete和MEDLINE Complete(通过EBSCOHost平台)进行了电子检索。研究由两名独立研究人员进行筛选和评估。纳入了12项研究,其中58.33% (n = 7)采用了既定的经济评估方法,5项研究(41.67%)概述了实施脓毒症捆绑治疗的成本影响。结果强调了报告成本结果、败血症定义的异质性,以及有限的患者水平数据和评估。尽管研究结果存在异质性,但本综述的结果表明,在急性护理环境中实施脓毒症捆绑治疗具有临床和经济效益。在66.7%的研究中,实施脓毒症捆绑治疗与降低医院和/或患者成本相关。需要进一步的研究来评估脓毒症包在急性护理环境之外的经济影响,包括亚急性和RACF,在儿科和成人人群中。此外,需要更多地注意成本影响评价方法的跨管辖区标准化,以促进绩效基准和结果的荟萃分析。
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
Journal of Hospital Infection
Journal of Hospital Infection 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
5.80%
发文量
271
审稿时长
19 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Hospital Infection is the editorially independent scientific publication of the Healthcare Infection Society. The aim of the Journal is to publish high quality research and information relating to infection prevention and control that is relevant to an international audience. The Journal welcomes submissions that relate to all aspects of infection prevention and control in healthcare settings. This includes submissions that: provide new insight into the epidemiology, surveillance, or prevention and control of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance in healthcare settings; provide new insight into cleaning, disinfection and decontamination; provide new insight into the design of healthcare premises; describe novel aspects of outbreaks of infection; throw light on techniques for effective antimicrobial stewardship; describe novel techniques (laboratory-based or point of care) for the detection of infection or antimicrobial resistance in the healthcare setting, particularly if these can be used to facilitate infection prevention and control; improve understanding of the motivations of safe healthcare behaviour, or describe techniques for achieving behavioural and cultural change; improve understanding of the use of IT systems in infection surveillance and prevention and control.
×
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