- Joined
- Aug 21, 2007
- Messages
- 8,572
- Reaction score
- 15,174
- Points
- 7,276
- Location
- On a box.
- Attending Physician
Why are you working at HCA those for profit bastards
One SIRS criteria with triage vitals and any CC that is infection related = they want rocephin/cultures/lactic acid
It is as simple as that. Don’t worry about if they will be admitted or not. Don’t worry if it is CHF vs COPD vs pneumonia vs PE. Just order the sepsis work up and move on - this is what they want.
Added bonus if you give 500 cc to 1 L bolus up front before getting the lactic acid back or one BP measurement of systolic <90.
Lack of options? Because many of us don't have many.Why are you working at HCA those for profit bastards
Lack of options? Because many of us don't have many.
For now... they're salivating at the impending oversupply.Plus believe it or not some HCA gigs actually pay well…
You have to see the patient to get the true CC before ordering. So hop to it (<10 min door to doc time at some places).Yeah, that's what bothers me.
Seeing as how 90 BPM (which is me after a cup of coffee) now counts, this is 90% of visits.
Plus, triage tends to write things like : "I'm dying" and "multiple complaints" as the chief complaint, so that's not helpful.
It's all fudging nonsense.
Manny Rivers showed more than thirty years ago that protocoling sepsis resuscitation was better than physician gestalt. Now that protocoling is de facto standard of care, has all this new surviving sepsis been shows to markedly improve outcomes over physician gestalt?
Who here is giving 30 ml / kg and broad spectrum antibiotics for the 19 yo old who comes in with symptomatic, uncomplicated strep throat?
19 yr old with BP <90 or lactic acid >4.0 and they only have strep?It's all fudging nonsense.
Manny Rivers showed more than thirty years ago that protocoling sepsis resuscitation was better than physician gestalt. Now that protocoling is de facto standard of care, has all this new surviving sepsis been shows to markedly improve outcomes over physician gestalt?
Who here is giving 30 ml / kg and broad spectrum antibiotics for the 19 yo old who comes in with symptomatic, uncomplicated strep throat?
You just order big order sets and turn off your brain.
If you’re worried about the patient getting 6000 ml of fluid with an EF of 15% you can document why you didn’t give 30 ml/kg bolus or why you’re using ideal body weight.
Damn you caught meDon't listen to him, he's just trying to get a bigger share of the money pot by giving you advise that dings your charting. You need to not only give 6,107 mL of fluid (6,106 is a FAILURE) you need to give it as fast as possible. If the EF < 15%, my distributively shocked patient gets the full bolus of actual body weight 30 mg/kg as a traditional bolus. If the EF % > 15%, he goes to the trauma bay and I use the MTP tubing and lines to dump it in. That's because another trick is constantly changing times on when the full bolus needs to be administered by. The safest thing to do is to prepare for the 5 or 15 minute sepsis bundles and keep rechecking lactates until either lactate is undetectable or the patient is undetectable, whichever happens first.
Don't listen to him, he's just trying to get a bigger share of the money pot by giving you advise that dings your charting. You need to not only give 6,107 mL of fluid (6,106 is a FAILURE) you need to give it as fast as possible. If the EF < 15%, my distributively shocked patient gets the full bolus of actual body weight 30 mg/kg as a traditional bolus. If the EF % > 15%, he goes to the trauma bay and I use the MTP tubing and lines to dump it in. That's because another trick is constantly changing times on when the full bolus needs to be administered by. The safest thing to do is to prepare for the 5 or 15 minute sepsis bundles and keep rechecking lactates until either lactate is undetectable or the patient is undetectable, whichever happens first.
It's all fudging nonsense.
Manny Rivers showed more than thirty years ago that protocoling sepsis resuscitation was better than physician gestalt. Now that protocoling is de facto standard of care, has all this new surviving sepsis been shows to markedly improve outcomes over physician gestalt?
Who here is giving 30 ml / kg and broad spectrum antibiotics for the 19 yo old who comes in with symptomatic, uncomplicated strep throat?
Rivers was very likely wrong (ProCESS, ARISE, and ProMISe, all great RCTs). I say "very likely" and not "definitively," because some data suggest certain septic phenotypes might actually benefit from EGDT (in one of my favourite articles of the past decade), but that's way out into the weeds. I also don't want to say "fraudulently," but he'll unfortunately have that suspicion lingering over him for the rest of his career.
Seymour CW, Kennedy JN, Wang S, et al. Derivation, validation, and potential treatment implications of novel clinical phenotypes for sepsis. JAMA. 2019;321(20):2003.
I'm of the thought that the real implications of the Rivers trial are widely recognized but poorly delineated. It was basically a randomized trial of early intensive care and aggressive resuscitation in sepsis. This was in an era when dynamic indicies of fluid status and actions targeted at increasing DO2 were still thought to be best practice. The followup studies showed that protocolizing care to a specific bundle was unncessary, as long as you still gave thoughtful early care. Andromeda showed that trending lactate is either unnecessary or counterproductive. Unfortunately, SEP-1, and especially the HCA bastardization of it, doesn't equal early aggressive, but thoughtful, resuscitation and we're probably moving back to the type of care given in the control arm of rivers.Rivers was very likely wrong (ProCESS, ARISE, and ProMISe, all great RCTs). I say "very likely" and not "definitively," because some data suggest certain septic phenotypes might actually benefit from EGDT (in one of my favourite articles of the past decade), but that's way out into the weeds. I also don't want to say "fraudulently," but he'll unfortunately have that suspicion lingering over him for the rest of his career.
Seymour CW, Kennedy JN, Wang S, et al. Derivation, validation, and potential treatment implications of novel clinical phenotypes for sepsis. JAMA. 2019;321(20):2003.
19 yr old with BP <90 or lactic acid >4.0 and they only have strep?
As for the antibiotics, clearly this is going home. HCA only cares about sepsis for the admits.
I do not agree with flooding the world in rocephin.
Rivers was very likely wrong (ProCESS, ARISE, and ProMISe, all great RCTs). I say "very likely" and not "definitively," because some data suggest certain septic phenotypes might actually benefit from EGDT (in one of my favourite articles of the past decade), but that's way out into the weeds. I also don't want to say "fraudulently," but he'll unfortunately have that suspicion lingering over him for the rest of his career.
Seymour CW, Kennedy JN, Wang S, et al. Derivation, validation, and potential treatment implications of novel clinical phenotypes for sepsis. JAMA. 2019;321(20):2003.
I'm of the thought that the real implications of the Rivers trial are widely recognized but poorly delineated. It was basically a randomized trial of early intensive care and aggressive resuscitation in sepsis. This was in an era when dynamic indicies of fluid status and actions targeted at increasing DO2 were still thought to be best practice. The followup studies showed that protocolizing care to a specific bundle was unncessary, as long as you still gave thoughtful early care. Andromeda showed that trending lactate is either unnecessary or counterproductive. Unfortunately, SEP-1, and especially the HCA bastardization of it, doesn't equal early aggressive, but thoughtful, resuscitation and we're probably moving back to the type of care given in the control arm of rivers.
Hopefully you were kind to your interns, then.What's even funnier about this is that Tenk and I know each other in real life. He was a med student when I was a junior resident, and was an intern when I was a senior.
Hard to say that Rivers was "wrong" when the standard of care prior to his protocol was to stick septic patients in the corner of the ER and not do anything. He showed an 16% absolute survival benefit.
It turns out that Rivers protocol was too broad and complicated...all patients really need is BP support (via fluids or vasopressors) and antibiotics as soon as possible. So I wouldn't consider him wrong. He was better than what was happening prior to him.
I was hard on them.Hopefully you were kind to your interns, then.
Hard to say that Rivers was "wrong" when the standard of care prior to his protocol was to stick septic patients in the corner of the ER and not do anything. He showed an 16% absolute survival benefit.
It turns out that Rivers protocol was too broad and complicated...all patients really need is BP support (via fluids or vasopressors) and antibiotics as soon as possible. So I wouldn't consider him wrong. He was better than what was happening prior to him.
?? Did Andromeda come out very recently?
This is the first I heard of this. I clearly remember stud(ies) showing lactates trending down in early treatment of sepsis improved outcomes.
EDIT:
Oh yea I remember comparing capillary refill time (CRT) to lactate reduction. Came out in 2019.
Interesting stuff. This capillary refill time stuff is not spoken of at my institution at all.
What's even more impressive is despite not having sepsis alerts, sepsis mortality is better in NZ than in the US.If you look at the new surviving sepsis guidelines, cap refill gets a shout out as a reasonable metric for assessing peripheral perfusion and titrating resuscitation.
Doubt it'll catch on in U.S. because it's too difficult to audit – easy to see someone's weight and how much fluid they've received.
Side note:
Let me just tell you how many sepsis alerts I've encountered over the past year: zero
It's glorious.
What's even more impressive is despite not having sepsis alerts, sepsis mortality is better in NZ than in the US.
Probably. I also think they don't emphasize fluid boluses... just emphasis on early antibiotics and to bolus as they deem necessary. Maybe @xaelia can comment.I'm sure at least part of that reason is that the average septic Kiwi doesn't have 8-13 other chronic, generally calorie related ailments.
We had this discussion at work - americans aren't overweight - we are just under tall, if we all were 7 feet 2 inches, we would be at our ideal weight - we just have to figure out how to grow taller.I'm sure at least part of that reason is that the average septic Kiwi doesn't have 8-13 other chronic, generally calorie related ailments.
We had this discussion at work - americans aren't overweight - we are just under tall, if we all were 7 feet 2 inches, we would be at our ideal weight - we just have to figure out how to grow taller.
To preface: I am in no way supporting people who whine about their health defects which are solely related to their only form of exercise being bicep curls of fork to mouth. That said, I think the "good old days" idea doesn't really work here. If we had the same cheap, calorie dense food back in 1930 that we do today, I think we would have become a nation of fatty fat fats a lot sooner than we did.It sickens me. Really does.
The whole "fatshaming" and "fatphobic" nonsense that I hear bandied about in common parlance is just pathetic.
We used to be a nation that would overcome anything. Everything. Because we could.
But now, its "I can't because I have ______ (euphemism for zero dedication to maintaining physical fitness)."
To preface: I am in no way supporting people who whine about their health defects which are solely related to their only form of exercise being bicep curls of fork to mouth. That said, I think the "good old days" idea doesn't really work here. If we had the same cheap, calorie dense food back in 1930 that we do today, I think we would have become a nation of fatty fat fats a lot sooner than we did.
I'm not saying this is an excuse. I just think that people on the whole were as lazy 100 years ago as they are today. The social/political/economic/agricultural/etc dynamics were simply different then.
Also, FWIW, I can't imagine the challenges of being an FP in this regard. I see tons of obese people who come in for their back pain that just won't get better. I don't have to fix that crap though. It's not an emergency. I would dread having to constantly explain to people that their joints hurt because Scotty says that their structural integrity field has been running at 300% and he can't hold it together much longer.
I read a comment on reddit the other day about a 24 year old, 200 lb woman being "not that big".It sickens me. Really does.
The whole "fatshaming" and "fatphobic" nonsense that I hear bandied about in common parlance is just pathetic.
We used to be a nation that would overcome anything. Everything. Because we could.
But now, its "I can't because I have ______ (euphemism for zero dedication to maintaining physical fitness)."
I read a comment on reddit the other day about a 24 year old, 200 lb woman being "not that big".
Muhammad Ali knocked out Sonny Liston at 210 lbs. The greatest heavyweight boxer of the 20th century is roughly the same weight as a typical childless mid 20s American woman in 2021.
In residency, we did our anesthesia rotation with the bariatrics service because our PD figured those were the tubes that would be most akin to what we'd see in the ED. Sad, yet highly accurate in retrospect.
Probably. I also think they don't emphasize fluid boluses... just emphasis on early antibiotics and to bolus as they deem necessary. Maybe @xaelia can comment.
you're using paper charts....Oh.
Uh.
We can't get sepsis alerts because paper.
For vital sign documentation and physician orders.
🙃
Yep.you're using paper charts....
lol wut
We have a Frankenstein's monster of implementation.I actually don't mind paper charts, to be honest. Used paper t sheets in residency, would love to have that back.