4.6 Article

Temporal Trends in the Epidemiology of Severe Postoperative Sepsis after Elective Surgery A Large, Nationwide Sample

期刊

ANESTHESIOLOGY
卷 112, 期 4, 页码 917-925

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181cea3d0

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Multiple studies have used administrative datasets to examine the epidemiology of sepsis in general, but the entity of postoperative sepsis has been studied less intensively. Therefore, we undertook an analysis of the epidemiology of postoperative sepsis using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, the largest in-patient dataset available in the United States. Methods: Elective admissions of patients aged 18 yr or older with a length of stay more than 3 days for any 1 of the 20 most common elective operative procedures were extracted from the dataset for the years 1997-2006. Postoperative sepsis was defined using the appropriate International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes; severe sepsis was defined as sepsis along with organ dysfunction. Logistic regression was used to assess the significance of temporal trends after adjusting for relevant demographic characteristics, operative procedure, and comorbid conditions. Results: We identified 2,039,776 admissions for analysis. The rate of severe sepsis increased from 0.3% in 1997 to 0.9% in 2006. This trend persisted after adjusting for relevant covariables-the adjusted odds ratio of severe sepsis per year increase in the study period was 1.12 (95% CI, 1.11-1.13; P < 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rate for patients with severe postoperative sepsis declined from 44.4% in 1997 to 34.0% in 2006; this trend also persisted after adjustment for relevant covariables-the adjusted odds ratio per year was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.93-0.95; P < 0.001). Conclusion: During the 10-yr period that we studied, there was a marked increase in the rate of severe postoperative sepsis but a concomitant decrease in the in-hospital mortality rate in severe sepsis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据