Objective: To evaluate the difference in proportion of patients receiving antimicrobials within one hour of sepsis recognition at sepsis-related Medical Emergency Team (MET) calls, without or with a sepsis-credentialed pharmacist. Design: Retrospective pre and post-intervention study. Setting: Single centre tertiary referral hospital. Participants: Patients admitted to the General Medicine Unit who had a sepsis-related MET call 24 hrs per day, and all other units from 17:00-08:00 hrs from August 2019 to Jan 2020 in the pre-intervention cohort and Aug 2020 to Jan 2021 for the post-intervention cohort. Interventions: Pharmacists attended MET calls to assist selection of antimicrobials, collaboratively prescribe with the medical officers, ensure supply, provide advice on dosing calculations, reconstitution, and administration. The pre-intervention cohort (Aug 2019-Jan 2020) did not have credentialed pharmacists’ involvement at MET calls. Outcome Measures: Proportion of patients who received antimicrobials within one hours of MET call. Results: There were 97 sepsis-related MET calls in the pre-intervention cohort and 110 sepsis-related MET calls in the post-intervention cohort. A significantly higher proportion of patients received antimicrobials within one hour with pharmacist involvement, compared to control (81.3% vs 59.7%, P = .0006). A reduction in median time to antimicrobial administration (43 min vs 54 min, P = .017) was observed. Conclusion: Sepsis-related MET calls with pharmacist involvement experienced a greater proportion of patients receiving antimicrobials within one hour of sepsis recognition, and a reduction in median time to antimicrobial administration. These results provide support for routine pharmacist involvement at MET calls to assist patients receiving medications in a timely and efficient manner.
SingerMDeutchmanSASeymourCW, et al.The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801-810.
2.
MayrFYendeSAngusDC. Epidemiology of severe sepsis. Virulence. 2014;5(1):4-11.
3.
AngusDCLinde-ZwirbleWTClermontG, et al.Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcome, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med. 2001;29(7):1303-1310.
4.
EvansLRhodesAAlhazzaniW, et al.Executive summary: surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for the management of sepsis and septic shock 2021. Crit Care Med.2021;49(11):1974-1982.
5.
KhaninaACairnsKAMcGloughlinS, et al.Improving sepsis care for hospital inpatients using existing medical emergency response systems improving sepsis care for hospital inpatients using existing medical emergency response systems. Infect Dis Health. 2020;25(2):63-70.
6.
DamianiEDonatiASerafiniG, et al.Effect of performance improvement programs on compliance with sepsis bundles and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. PLoS One. 2015;10(5):e0125827.
7.
KumarARobertsDWoodKE, et al. Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(6):1589-1596.
8.
CavanaughJBSullivanJBEastNNodzonJN. Importance of pharmacy involvement in the treatment of sepsis. Hosp Pharm.2017;52(3):191-197.
9.
BeardsleyJRJonesCMWilliamsonJChouJCurrie-CoyoyMJacksonT. Pharmacist involvement in a multidisciplinary initiative to reduce sepsis-related mortality. Am J Health-Syst Pharm.2016;73(3):143-149.
10.
FlynnJDMcConeghyKWFlanneryAHNestorMBransonPHattonKW. Utilization of pharmacist responders as a component of a multidisciplinary sepsis bundle. Ann Pharmacother.2014;48(9):1145-1151.
11.
RomanCDooleyMNevillA, et al.Introduction of an emergency medicine pharmacist-led sepsis alert response system in the emergency department: a cohort study. Emerg Med Australas.2023;35(4):564-571.
12.
HuaPUEdwardsGVan DykE, et al.Expansion of the partnered pharmacist medication charting model on admission in the General Medicine Unit — initiation of new medications. J Pharm Pract Res. 2022;53(1):26-31.
