Effectiveness of Different Interventions for Implementing Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) Guidelines on Compliance and Mortality: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

February 20, 2014 updated by: Dr Yaseen Arabi, King Abdullah International Medical Research Center
This is a systematic review and Meta-Analysis of interventions for implementation of Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines and their impact on compliance and mortality reduction

Study Overview

Status

Unknown

Conditions

Detailed Description

The implementation of the sepsis resuscitation bundle recommended by the SSC guidelines has been shown to increase compliance and reduce mortality in several settings. Different implementation strategies have been utilized, including education, posters, reminders, audit and feedback, paper-based and electronic sepsis screening tools, clinical pathway and sepsis response teams. Different studies showed a considerable variation effect on compliance and mortality.It has been suggested that implantation strategies vary in there effect from low impact for human-based interventions such as education and training, rules and policies, reminders, checklists and double checks, however, reaching high effect for system based interventions like automation and computerization and forcing function. However, this has not been studied in relation to the implementation of SSC bundle. As such, many projects continue to invest on low-impact interventions with modest change in compliance and mortality. Multiple interventions were adopted by different centers worldwide to implement SSC guidelines. These interventions vary on their level of compliance and outcomes. The effectiveness of intervention if system oriented is more effective than human oriented. The hierarchy of effectiveness assigning forcing function intervention on the top of the pyramid and the training and education on the bottom.

The investigators hypothesize that interventions system based interventions are more likely to be more effective in improving the compliance with sepsis resuscitation bundle and in improving mortality.

The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness of different interventions for implementation of Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines and their impact on compliance and mortality reduction.

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Anticipated)

30

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Research articles

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

Any study or data

  1. assessing any intervention method for implementing SSC guidelines in regards to compliance and mortality,
  2. has a comparison group,
  3. reported data on sepsis resuscitation bundle compliance and mortality

Exclusion Criteria:

Any study used other than SSC guidelines in sepsis management will be excluded.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
Low intensity intervention
human oriented interventions with less consideration to the system based act including, but not limited to, education, training, sepsis profile and posters with protocol algorithms.
Intermediate intensity intervention
interventions that lie in between human oriented and system oriented Including, but not limited to, sepsis protocols, daily audits, feedback and clinical pathway
High intensity intervention
system based interventions with less involvement of human effect including, but not limited to, electronic alert systems and sepsis response team.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) Guidelines Compliance and Mortality
Time Frame: 2002 - 2014 (12 years)
2002 - 2014 (12 years)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

King Abdullah International Medical Research Center

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

February 1, 2014

Primary Completion (Anticipated)

June 1, 2014

Study Completion (Anticipated)

September 1, 2014

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 20, 2014

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 20, 2014

First Posted (Estimate)

February 21, 2014

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

February 21, 2014

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 20, 2014

Last Verified

February 1, 2014

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • Other Identifier: No secondary ID

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe