Write a paper (min 3 pages) using APA Style 7th Edition to criticize any of the articules in the document attach (#1) answering questions 1 and 2 from document attached (#2). Please be aware to avoid plagiarism

Sepsis Prevention Management and treatment

Sepsis Prevention Management and treatment
9

Sepsis Prevention Management and Treatment

Nursing Science and the Research Process

01/20/2021

Association of care bundle for early Sepsis Management with Mortality among with hospital

Authors; Robert H. Brook, Daniel Z. Uslan & Jack Needleman

Tittle (year); Association of a Care Bundle for Early Sepsis Management With Mortality Among Patients With Hospital-Onset or Community-Onset Sepsis, 2020

Methodology;

cohort study

Sample; 6404 patients selected through questionnaires

Study type: retrospective cohort study

Results; among the 6404 participants, 3535 men had hospital-onset sepsis associated to reduced mortality.

Conclusions; broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotic treatment is related to mortality of patients with sepsis.

Recommendations; the current sepsis quality parameters should be refined

Requirements and technologies improving sepsis management

Authors; Bryan M. Gale and Kendall K. Hall,

Tittle (year): The Use of Patient Monitoring Systems to Improve Sepsis Recognition and Outcomes: A Systematic Review

Methodology; Secondary Data Analysis

Sample: 19 peer-reviewed articles selected from CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Cochrane through systematic review

Study type: literature review

Results; there was a mixture of study results but the evidence for process measure showed improvement outside the ICU

Conclusions: current literature is mixed on the effectiveness of automated sepsis PMSs on sepsis recognition

Recommendations: more testing on the effects of systems should be conducted

Surviving sepsis guidelines

Authors; Andrew Rhodes, Laura E Evans, Waleed Alhazzani

Tittle (year): Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

Methodology: surveys

Sample: 55 international experts selected to attend a conference

Study type: randomized

Results: Surviving Sepsis Guideline was strongly recommended by 32 members, 39 weak recommendations.

Conclusions: recommendations based on evidence on acute management of sepsis is based on improved outcomes for patients who are critically ill

Recommendations; more recommendations should be sort

Sepsis alert in Emergency D

Authors; ROBERT GAUER, MD, and DAMON FORBES

Tittle (year): Sepsis: Diagnosis and Management, 2020

Methodology; literature review

Sample; 8 peer reviewed articles selected and analysed

Study type: literature review

Results; fluid resuscitation is mandatory in the early management of sepsis

Conclusions: the guidelines published in 2016 are controversial

Recommendations; the 2016 guidelines should be revised to avoid future failures

Effectiveness of early management Bundle for sever sepsis

Authors; Robert H. Brook, Daniel Z. Uslan & Jack Needleman
Tittle (year); Association of a Care Bundle for Early Sepsis Management With Mortality Among Patients With Hospital-Onset or Community-Onset Sepsis, 2020
Methodology; cohort study
Sample; 6404 patients selected through questionnaires
Study type: retrospective cohort study
Results; among the 6404 participants, 3535 men had hospital-onset sepsis associated to reduced mortality.
Conclusions; broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotic treatment is related to mortality of patients with sepsis.
Recommendations; the current sepsis quality parameters should be refined

Recognition and management of sepsis

Authors; Greg Bleakley, Mark Cole

Tittle (year); Recognition and management of sepsis: the nurse’s role, 2020

Methodology;

Sample; 4 peer-reviewed articles from PubMed

Study type: literature review

Results; most nurses require training and updating of guidelines on intervention of sepsis

Conclusions; nurses should different strategies to ensure quick actions and reduce the death of sepsis students

Recommendations; nurses should be furnished with clinical guidelines to allow prompt actions on sepsis

Managing sepsis effectively with national early warning score

Authors;

Joanne Jones

Tittle (year); Managing sepsis effectively with national early warning scores and screening tools, 2017

Methodology; Secondary Data Analysis

Sample; 6 peer-reviewed articles

Study type: literature review

Results; national early warning scores and screening tools increase the effective management of sepsis

Conclusions; national early warning scores and screening tools should be employed in sepsis management

Recommendations; More screening tools should be researched and applied

Adults’ sepsis in. pre-hospital environment

Authors; Mark Langley, Carrie Langley

Tittle; Adult sepsis in a pre-hospital environment, 2013

Methodology; Secondary Data Analysis

Sample; 9 peer-reviewed journals

Study type: literature review

Results; high level of care at the onset of sepsis reduces mortality

Conclusions; care of patients with sepsis should be started at the onset of the illness

Recommendations; ratified guidelines should be introduced for pre-hospital professionals in management of sepsis

Sepsis and chronic wounds

Authors; Richard White, Steven LA Jeffery, Keith Cutting

Tittle (year); Sepsis and chronic wounds: The extent of the issue and what we should we be aware of, 2015

Methodology; Secondary data analysis

Sample; 3 peer-reviewed articles

Study type: literature review

Results; sepsis results in fatal wounds, shock and organ failure if not treated early

Conclusions; sepsis should be treated early to avoid wounds and multiple organ failure

Recommendations; clinicians should also be aware of the implications of over-diagnoses

Treatment of sepsis

Authors; Chanu Rhee, Travis M Jones, Yasir Hamad, Anupam Pande

Tittle (year); Prevalence, Underlying Causes, and Preventability of Sepsis-Associated Mortality in US Acute Care Hospitals, 2019

Methodology; focus group

Sample; 568 randomly selected from 6 hospitals in US

Study type: cohort

Results; 198 hospitalized patients died due to sepsis, 92 due to progressive cancer, 29 due to dementia, 63 due to solid cancer, 31 due to hematologic cancer

Conclusions; although sepsis is the main cause of mortality, most deaths are associated to underlying conditions

Recommendations; innovations in prevention should are important in reduction of sepsis-associated deaths

Sepsis mortality

Authors; Chanu Rhee, Travis M Jones, Yasir Hamad, Anupam Pande
Tittle (year); Prevalence, Underlying Causes, and Preventability of Sepsis-Associated Mortality in US Acute Care Hospitals, 2019
Methodology; focus group
Sample; 568 randomly selected from 6 hospitals in US
Study type: cohort
Results; 198 hospitalized patients died due to sepsis, 92 due to progressive cancer, 29 due to dementia, 63 due to solid cancer, 31 due to hematologic cancer
Conclusions; although sepsis is the main cause of mortality, most deaths are associated to underlying conditions
Recommendations; innovations in prevention should are important in reduction of sepsis-associated deaths

Nursing early detection of sepsis

Authors; Vincent X Liu , Gabriel J Escobar , Rakesh Chaudhary , Hallie C Prescott

Tittle (year); Healthcare Utilization and Infection in the Week Prior to Sepsis Hospitalization, 2018

Methodology; Retrospective study.

Sample; 14,658 Kaiser Permanente Northern California sepsis hospitalizations and 31,369 Veterans Health Administration sepsis hospitalizations

Study type: randomized

Results; in Kaiser Permanente Northern California 2648 patients and 3,858 Veterans Health Administration patients had a presepsis encounter

Conclusions; more than 45% of sepsis patients had seen a clinician before being admitted

Recommendations; the presepsis encounters provide an opportunity to improve treatment and risk reduction

Sepsis due to nosocomial pneumonia

Authors; David J Murphy, Peter J Pronovost

Tittle (year); Reducing preventable harm: comment on “Clinical and economic outcomes attributable to health care-associated sepsis and pneumonia, 2010

Methodology; secondary data analysis

Sample; 5 peer-reviewed articles from PubMed

Study type: literature review

Results; more than 60% of sepsis patient face economic hardships due to sepsis and pneumonia

Conclusions; sepsis and pneumonia’s preventable harm should include both clinical and economic outcomes 

Recommendations; more research should be carried out on reducing preventable harm

Hospitalization cost due to sepsis

Authors; Timothy G Buchman, Steven Q Simpson, Kimberly L Sciarretta

Tittle (year); Sepsis among Medicare Beneficiaries: 1. The Burdens of Sepsis, 2012-2018, 2020

Methodology; secondary data analysis

Sample; Medicare beneficiaries in 2012 to 2018 analysed

Study type: literature review

Results; the total cost of sepsis control increased from $17,792,657,303 to $22,439,794,212

Conclusions; sepsis is still highly expensive to control and treat

Recommendations; more funds should be availed to control sepsis and sepsis shock

Sepsis alert

Authors; POWERS, KELLY A.; BURCHELL, PATRICIA

Tittle (year); Sepsis alert: Avoiding the shock, 2010

Methodology; secondary data analysis

Sample; a peer-reviewed journal from PubMed

Study type: literature review

Results; more than 45% sepsis patients suffer from shock

Conclusions: sepsis shock can be avoided through a proactive approach

Recommendations; more improvements should be made in identifying and controlling sepsis shock

Delay in administration of 2nd dosage of AX after admission

Authors; Daniel Leisman , Victor Huang, Qiuping Zhou, Jeanie Gribben, Andrea Bianculli,

Tittle (year); Delayed Second Dose Antibiotics for Patients Admitted from the Emergency Department with Sepsis: Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Outcomes, 2017

Methodology; focus group

Sample; 828 sepsis cases from a single health centre

Study type: Retrospective

Results; 272 of the 828 sepsis cases had a more than 25% delay

Conclusions; patients under a shorter half-life pharmacotherapy have main second dose delays

Recommendations; identify and realise ways of lowering major second dose delays

Medication of choice

Authors; Aaron J Heffernan, Rebecca A Curran , Kerina J Denny, Fekade B Sime

Tittle (year); Ceftriaxone dosing in patients admitted from the emergency department with sepsis, 2020

Methodology; focus groups

Sample; All patients in an emergency department and with sepsis

Study type: randomized

Results; 1-g once-daily dose does not achieve the minimum therapeutic ceftriaxone exposure in > 90% patients with a creatinine clearance ≥ 60 mL/min.

Conclusions; 2-g once-daily dose is appropriate for infected patients with a creatinine clearance ≤ 140 mL/min.

Recommendations; clinical trials in future should address how optimization of ceftriaxone dose improves sepsis treatment.

Epidemiology

Authors; Carly J Paoli, Mark A Reynolds, Meenal Sinha, Matthew Gitlin, Elliott Crouser

Tittle (year); Epidemiology and Costs of Sepsis in the United States-An Analysis Based on Timing of Diagnosis and Severity Level, 2018

Methodology; observational study

Sample; 2,566,689 sepsis cases in 2010 to 2016 admission in a medical centre

Study type: cohort

Results; a mortality of 12.5% was recorded for sepsis but the severity varied with a range of 5.6%, 14.9%, and 34.2% for patients without organ dysfunction, severe sepsis, and septic shock.

Conclusions; lowest severity of sepsis led to increased burden and cost

Recommendations; methods of identifying and treating sepsis should be innovated

Prepared by Louise Kaplan, PhD, ARNP, FNP-BC, FAANP

Senior Policy Fellow, Department of Nursing Practice and Policy
Louise.kaplan@ana.org

Framework for How to Read and Critique a Research Study

1. Critiquing the research article

a. Title – Does it accurately describe the article?

b. Abstract – Is it representative of the article?

c. Introduction – Does it make the purpose of the article clear?

d. Statement of the problem – Is the problem properly introduced?

e. Purpose of the study – Has the reason for conducting the research been

explained?

f. Research question(s) – Is/are the research question(s) clearly defined and if

not, should they be?

g. Theoretical framework – Is the theoretical framework described? If there is

not a theoretical framework, should there be?

h. Literature review – Is the literature review relevant to the study,

comprehensive, and include recent research? Does the literature review

support the need for the study?

i. Methods – Is the design appropriate for the study? Does the sample fit with

the research design and is the size sufficient? Was a data collection

instrument needed? How were data collected? Were reliability and validity

accounted for?

j. Analysis – Is the analytical approach consistent with the study questions and

research design?

k. Results – Are the results presented clearly in the text, tables and figures? Are

the statistics clearly explained?

l. Discussion – Are the results explained in relationship to the theoretical

framework, research questions, and the significance to nursing?

m. Limitations – Are the limitations presented and their implications discussed?

n. Conclusion – Are there recommendations for nursing practice, future

research, and policymakers?

2. Determine the level and quality of the evidence using a scale (several can be found

in ANA’s Research Toolkit www.nursingworld.org/Research-Toolkit/Appraising-the-

Evidence )

3. Decide if the study is applicable to your practice

a. Can you use the results and recommendations in your practice?

http://www.nursingworld.org/Research-Toolkit/Appraising-the-Evidence

http://www.nursingworld.org/Research-Toolkit/Appraising-the-Evidence