Evidence Hub

Two Decades of Mortality Trends among Patients with Severe Sepsis: A Comparative Meta-analysis

E. Stevenson, A. Rubenstein, Gregory T Radin, R. Wiener, A. Walkey

Critical Care Medicine, 2014

14,418 participants · 642 citations

Abstract

Objectives:Trends in severe sepsis mortality derived from administrative data may be biased by changing International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification, coding practices. We sought to determine temporal trends in severe sepsis mortality using clinical trial data that does not rely on International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modifications coding and compare mortality trends in trial data with those observed from administrative data. Design:We searched MEDLINE for multicenter randomized trials that enrolled patients with severe sepsis from 1991 to 2009. We calculated standardized mortality ratios for each trial from observed 28-day mortality of usual care participants and predicted mortality from severity-of-illness scores. To compare mortality trends from clinical trials to administrative data, we identified adult severe sepsis hospitalizations in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, 1993–2009, using two previously validated algorithms. Setting:In-patient. Patients:Patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Interventions:None. Measurements and Main Results:Of 3,244 potentially eligible articles, we included 36 multicenter severe sepsis trials, with a total of 14,418 participants in a usual care arm. Participants with severe sepsis receiving usual care had a 28-day mortality of 33.2%. Observed mortality decreased 3.0% annually (95% CI, 0.8%–5.0%; p = 0.009), decreasing from 46.9% (standardized mortality ratio 0.94; 95% CI,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 14,418 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free