↓ Skip to main content

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign bundles and outcome: results from the International Multicentre Prevalence Study on Sepsis (the IMPreSS study)

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
17 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
322 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
348 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Surviving Sepsis Campaign bundles and outcome: results from the International Multicentre Prevalence Study on Sepsis (the IMPreSS study)
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00134-015-3906-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew Rhodes, Gary Phillips, Richard Beale, Maurizio Cecconi, Jean Daniel Chiche, Daniel De Backer, Jigeeshu Divatia, Bin Du, Laura Evans, Ricard Ferrer, Massimo Girardis, Despoina Koulenti, Flavia Machado, Steven Q. Simpson, Cheng Cheng Tan, Xavier Wittebole, Mitchell Levy

Abstract

Despite evidence demonstrating the value of performance initiatives, marked differences remain between hospitals in the delivery of care for patients with sepsis. The aims of this study were to improve our understanding of how compliance with the 3-h and 6-h Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) bundles are used in different geographic areas, and how this relates to outcome. This was a global, prospective, observational, quality improvement study of compliance with the SSC bundles in patients with either severe sepsis or septic shock. A total of 1794 patients from 62 countries were enrolled in the study with either severe sepsis or septic shock. Overall compliance with all the 3-h bundle metrics was 19 %. This was associated with lower hospital mortality than non-compliance (20 vs. 31 %, p < 0.001). Overall compliance with all the 6-h bundle metrics was 36 %. This was associated with lower hospital mortality than non-compliance (22 vs. 32 %, p < 0.001). After adjusting the crude mortality differences for ICU admission, sepsis status (severe sepsis or septic shock), location of diagnosis, APACHE II score and country, compliance remained independently associated with improvements in hospital mortality for both the 3-h bundle (OR = 0.64 (95 % CI 0.47-0.87), p = 0.004)) and 6-h bundle (OR = 0.71 (95 % CI 0.56-0.90), p = 0.005)). Compliance with all of the evidence-based bundle metrics was not high. Patients whose care included compliance with all of these metrics had a 40 % reduction in the odds of dying in hospital with the 3-h bundle and 36 % for the 6-h bundle.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 348 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 341 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 42 12%
Researcher 40 11%
Student > Master 40 11%
Other 34 10%
Student > Bachelor 34 10%
Other 88 25%
Unknown 70 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 188 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 2%
Other 26 7%
Unknown 81 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 September 2021.
All research outputs
#1,882,827
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#1,532
of 5,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,985
of 281,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#3
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,570 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,635 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.