RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 RIGHT SEPSIS CLASSIFICATION- MUST FOR ANTIMICROBIAL STEWARDSHIP: A LONGITUDINAL OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.08.07.24311603
DO 10.1101/2024.08.07.24311603
A1 Pilania, Jaideep
A1 Panda, Prasan Kumar
A1 Das, Ananya
A1 Chauhan, Udit
A1 Kant, Ravi
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/08/07/2024.08.07.24311603.abstract
AB Background Sepsis is a critical medical condition characterized by life-threatening organ dysfunction triggered by a dysregulated response to infection. It poses a substantial global health burden, with significant morbidity, mortality, and economic costs, particularly pronounced in low- and middle-income countries. Effective management of sepsis relies on early recognition and appropriate intervention, underscoring the importance of accurate classification to guide treatment decisions.Objective This longitudinal observational study aimed to assess the distribution of sepsis categories and the use of empirical antibiotics classified by the WHO AWaRe system in a tertiary care hospital in Northern India. The study also aimed to highlight implications for antimicrobial stewardship by examining the use of AWaRe group antibiotics and their correlation with sepsis classifications.Methods A total of 1867 patients admitted with suspected sepsis were screened, with 230 meeting inclusion criteria. Patients were categorized into different sepsis classes (Asepsis, Possible Sepsis, Probable Sepsis, Confirm Sepsis) and followed until discharge or Day-28. Descriptive statistical analysis was employed to assess sepsis categories and empirical antibiotic usage classified by Access, Watch, and Reserve categories according to the WHO AWaRe system.Results Among the study cohort (mean age 40.70 ± 14.49 years, 50.9% female), initial sepsis classification predominantly included Probable Sepsis (51.3%) and Possible Sepsis (35.7%), evolving to Asepsis (57.8%) upon final classification. Empirical antibiotic use showed a concerning predominance of Watch group antibiotics (92.5%), with Ceftriaxone (45.7%) and piperacillin-tazobactam (31.7%) being the most commonly prescribed.Conclusion The dynamic nature of sepsis classification underscores the complexity of diagnosing and managing this condition. Accurate categorization is pivotal for clinical decision-making, optimizing antibiotic use, and combating antimicrobial resistance. The majority of the asepsis category was levelled as probable or possible sepsis and given antibiotics. The high reliance on Watch group antibiotics in empirical therapy signals a need for enhanced diagnostic strategies to refine treatment initiation, potentially reducing unnecessary antibiotic exposure. Future efforts should focus on establishing sepsis classification checklists and promoting adherence to antimicrobial stewardship principles to mitigate the global threat of antimicrobial resistance.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Approval was given by the Institutional Ethics Committee (DHR Reg No- EC/NEW/Inst/2022/UA/0180) of AIIMS Rishikesh with approval no- AIIMS/IEC/22/610.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors