Infectious Diseases Society of America Position Paper: Recommended Revisions to the National Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Early Management Bundle (SEP-1) Sepsis Quality Measure

Chanu Rhee, Kathleen Chiotos, Sara E. Cosgrove, Emily L. Heil, Sameer S. Kadri, Andre C. Kalil, David N. Gilbert, Henry Masur, Edward J. Septimus, Daniel A. Sweeney, Jeffrey R. Strich, Dean L. Winslow, Michael Klompas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Scopus citations

Abstract

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Early Management Bundle (SEP-1) measure has appropriately established sepsis as a national priority. However, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA and five additional endorsing societies) is concerned about SEP-1's potential to drive antibiotic overuse because it does not account for the high rateof sepsis overdiagnosis and encourages aggressive antibiotics for all patients with possible sepsis, regardless of the certainty of diagnosis or severity of illness. IDSA is also concerned that SEP-1's complex "time zero"definition is not evidence-based and is prone to inter-observer variation. In this position paper, IDSA outlines several recommendations aimed at reducing the risk of unintended consequences of SEP-1 while maintaining focus on its evidence-based elements. IDSA's core recommendation is to limit SEP-1 to septic shock, for which the evidence supporting the benefit of immediate antibiotics is greatest. Prompt empiric antibiotics are often appropriate for suspected sepsis without shock, but IDSA believes there is too much heterogeneity and difficulty definingthis population, uncertainty about the presence of infection, and insufficient data on the necessity of immediate antibiotics to support a mandatory treatment standard for all patients in this category. IDSA believes guidance on managing possible sepsis without shock is more appropriate for guidelines that can delineate the strengths and limitations of supporting evidence and allow clinicians discretion in applying specific recommendations to individual patients. Removing sepsis without shock from SEP-1 will mitigate the risk of unnecessary antibiotic prescribing for noninfectious syndromes, simplify data abstraction, increase measure reliability, and focus attention on the populationmost likely to benefit from immediate empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)541-552
Number of pages12
JournalClinical Infectious Diseases
Volume72
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 15 2021

Keywords

  • IDSA
  • SEP-1
  • sepsis
  • septic shock
  • severe sepsis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Microbiology (medical)
  • Infectious Diseases

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Infectious Diseases Society of America Position Paper: Recommended Revisions to the National Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Early Management Bundle (SEP-1) Sepsis Quality Measure'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this