English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Claims-based algorithms are commonly used to identify sepsis in health services research because the laboratory features required to define clinical criteria may not be available in administrative data.    Methods  We evaluated claims-based sepsis algorithms among adults in the US aged ≥65 years with Medicare health insurance enrolled in the REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study. Suspected infections from baseline (2003–2007) through December 31, 2012 were analyzed. Two claims-based algorithms were evaluated: (1) infection plus organ dysfunction diagnoses or sepsis diagnoses (Medicare-Implicit/Explicit) and (2) Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock Measure diagnoses (Medicare-CMS). Three classifications based on clinical criteria were used as standards for comparison: (1) the sepsis-related organ failure assessment (SOFA) score (REGARDS-SOFA), (2) “quick” SOFA (REGARDS-qSOFA), and (3) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention electronic health record criteria (REGARDS-EHR).    Results  There were 2217 suspected infections among 9522 participants included in the current study. The total number of suspected infections classified as sepsis was 468 for Medicare-Implicit/Explicit, 249 for Medicare-CMS, 541 for REGARDS-SOFA, 185 for REGARDS-qSOFA, and 331 for REGARDS-EHR. The overall agreement between Medicare-Implicit/Explicit and REGARDS-SOFA, REGARDS-qSOFA, and REGARDS-EHR was 77, 79, and 81%, respectively, sensitivity was 46, 53, and 57%, and specificity was 87, 82, and 85%. Comparing Medicare-CMS and REGARDS-SOFA, REGARDS-qSOFA, and REGARDS-EHR, agreement was 77, 87, and 85%, respectively, sensitivity was 27, 41, and 36%, and specificity was 94, 92, and 93%. Events meeting the REGARDS-SOFA classification had a lower 90-day mortality rate (140.7 per 100 person-years) compared with the Medicare-CMS (296.1 per 100 person-years), REGARDS-qSOFA (238.6 per 100 person-years), Medicare-Implicit/Explicit (219.4 per 100 person-years), and REGARDS-EHR classifications (201.8 per 100 person-years).    Conclusion  Claims-based sepsis algorithms have high agreement and specificity but low sensitivity when compared with clinical criteria. Both claims-based algorithms identified a patient population with similar 90-day mortality rates as compared with classifications based on qSOFA and EHR criteria but higher mortality relative to SOFA criteria.

bmc medical research methodology

Agreement of claims-based methods for identifying sepsis with clinical criteria in the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) cohort