Retrospective observational study shows enhanced sepsis incidence metrics in hospitalized adults, highlighting clinical credibility improvements.
Objective: To evaluate potential modifications to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)’s Adult Sepsis Event (ASE) definition aimed at mitigating variable blood culturing practices, better-capturing cases where timely care may have prevented deterioration, and improving clinical credibility. Design: Retrospective observational study Setting: 5 US hospitals Patients: Hospitalized adults, 2015–2022 Methods: We assessed the impact of potential ASE modifications on community-onset sepsis incidence and mortality and reviewed 280 charts to assess positive predictive value (PPV) for clinical sepsis. Results: Among 1,101,252 hospitalized adults, 51,712 (4.7%) met community-onset ASE criteria (16.1% mortality). Expanding infection criteria to include present-on-admission infection codes when blood cultures were not drawn, non-blood clinical cultures, and discharge alive on antibiotic day three increased incidence by 15.0%, 12.2%, and 4.9%, respectively; all led to mild decreases in mortality rates. Expanding organ dysfunction criteria to include hypotension increased ASE incidence by 32.3% and decreased mortality by 18.5%. Broadening respiratory failure criteria to include noninvasive ventilation and high-flow oxygen had minimal impact. On chart review, original ASE criteria had 80% PPV for clinical sepsis. PPV was similar when identifying infection using present-on-admission infection codes instead of blood cultures and when including patients discharged alive on antibiotic day three. PPV decreased to 50% when using non-blood clinical cultures to identify infection, 17% when using single hypotension values alone to indicate organ dysfunction, and 30% when all ASE components occurred exactly 2 days vs within +/-1 day from the blood culture day. Conclusions: Our findings inform modifications to ASE to optimize its utility for national epidemiologic monitoring and quality measurement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Millham et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: