HHE Sponsored supplement: Sepsis | Page 10

The economic burden of sepsis is huge and increasing, and indirect costs of survivors due to lower quality of life and follow-up diseases remain a ‘fuzzy zone’ References 1 Angus DC et al. Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcome, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med 2001;29:1303–10. 2 Majno G. The ancient riddle of sigma eta psi iota sigma (sepsis). J Infect Dis 1991;163:937–45. 3 Cerra FB. The systemic septic response: multiple systems organ failure. Crit Care Clin 1985;1:591–607. 4 Schottmüller H. Verhandlungen des 31. Deutschen Kongresses für Innere Medizin 1914;31:257–280. 5 Bone RC et al. Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use survivors have been underestimated. Meanwhile, it is well known that, after the index sepsis episode, survivors suffer for many years from a higher risk of hospital readmissions, as well as additional morbidities such as cognitive impairment, cardiovascular disease, and of death. Nearly 60% of sepsis survivors have more than one episode of rehospitalisation, most often due to infection. Compared with statistical life tables, sepsis survivors also have a reduced life expectancy, probably due to more cardiovascular diseases, and a higher risk of cognitive impairment. 15 Although the data are quite consistent, strong evidence showing a causal link between sepsis and post-acute fatality is still missing. In studies reporting non-sepsis control arm comparisons, sepsis was not consistently associated with a higher hazard ratio for post- acute mortality. The additional hazard associated with sepsis was greatest when compared with the general population. The presence of comorbidities, older age, and male gender seem to be independent predictors of post-acute mortality in sepsis survivors, challenging a clear and evidence-based causality relationship. Additional epidemiologic studies with recent patient level data that address the pre-illness trajectory, confounding, and varying control groups are needed to estimate sepsis-attributable additional risk and modifiable risk factors. 16 Little is known about the long-term consequences on functional and cognitive recovery after sepsis. Intensivists have defined a syndrome in survivors of critical illness, including sepsis, termed post-ICU syndrome, which is characterised by insomnia, nightmares, fatigue, depression, loss of cognitive function and loss of self-esteem. Almost half of the sepsis survivors report at least three of these symptoms. These individuals demonstrate cognitive deficits in verbal learning and memory up to two years after the hospital discharge. The consensus has been that sepsis survivors have a moderate-to- severe cognitive impairment 10% higher than the general population. Equally important, patients who survived sepsis had a much higher incidence of new impairments than their age-matched counterparts. 17 Needless to say, that these sequelae of sepsis per se contribute to an increasing economic burden; data, however, are very limited, and especially valid analyses for add-on costs by individuals surviving sepsis are more or less not existing. In contrast, most analyses focus on the Conclusions Even though surgical and pharmacological approaches in sepsis therapy are constantly improving, epidemiological studies show an increase in incidence of sepsis over the last 20 years. At present, the rough estimate for new cases of sepsis and septic shock is between 200 and 300 cases per 100,000 inhabitants and year in Western Countries. The differences between available studies are based on different criteria for definition of sepsis and data resources. The overall fatality is decreasing, with a trend for lower mortality rates from administrative data compared to protocol-based, prospective studies. Current estimates are between 30% and 50% mortality rate for sepsis/septic shock on ICUs. The economic burden is huge and increasing, especially in older patients and non-survivors; in addition, the indirect costs for sepsis survivors due to the sequelae of the disease with lower quality of life, higher rate of unemployment, and follow-up diseases is a still unknown ‘fuzzy zone’ of a high and probably increasing cost factor, which requires a completely new approach for research projects, that is, a ‘joint venture’ between acute care hospitals, insurances, rehabilitation centres, and physicians/nurses outside the hospitals, who take care of this increasing group of individuals/patients. of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest 1992;101:1644–55. 6 Levy MM et al. 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference. Crit Care Med 2003 31:1250–6. 7 Opal SM. Concept of PIRO as a new conceptual framework to understand sepsis. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2005;6(3 Suppl): S55–S60. 8 Singer M et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA 2018;44:153–6. 12 Fleischmann C et al. Hospital incidence and mortality rates of sepsis. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2016;113:159–66. 13 Fleischmann C et al. Assessment of global incidence and mortality of hospital-treated sepsis. Current estimates and limitations. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2016;193:259–72. 14 Suarez De La Rica A, Gilsanz F, Maseda E. Epidemiologic trends of sepsis in western countries. Ann Transl Med 2016;4:325–30. 15 Shankar-Hari M, Rubenfeld GD. Understanding long-term outcomes following sepsis: Implications and challenges. Curr Infect Dis Rep 2016;18:37–45. 16 Shankar-Hari M et al. 2016;315:801–10. 9 Seymour CW et al. Assessment of clinical criteria for sepsis: For the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA 2016;315:762–74. 10 Shankar-Hari M et al. Developing a new definition and assessing new clinical criteria for septic shock: For the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA 2016;315:775–87. 11 Marx G; SepNet Critical Care Trials Group. Incidence of severe sepsis and septic shock in German intensive care units: the prospective, multicentre INSEP study. Intensive Care Med 10 HHE 2018 | hospitalhealthcare.com overall costs of sepsis as a disease, some of them tried to estimate the follow-up costs, when patients survived. There is growing evidence that medical care costs represent a large proportion of the gross domestic product in developed countries, and ICUs consume a significant amount of those resources. 18 The greatest impact is based on the permanent staffing and other overhead costs, and from the patient’s side, mechanical ventilation in severely ill patients, and sepsis management are responsible for the majority of the economic burden. In a large, prospective trial, Moerer et al analysed the individual patient- related cost of intensive care at various hospital levels and for different groups of diseases in 51 German ICUs. 19 The mean total costs per patient and day were € 791 ± 305, with the highest cost in septic patients (€ 1090 ± 422). An estimation based on recent incidence rates of sepsis and septic shock demonstrates, that this results in direct ICU treatment costs for sepsis of 1.1–2.45 Billion € per year, or – in other words – that between 21% and 46% of total ICU costs are spent on sepsis management. 19 Evidence for a causal link between sepsis and long-term mortality: a systematic review of epidemiologic studies. Crit Care 2016;20:101–13. 17 Hotchkiss RS et al. Sepsis and septic shock. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2016;2:16045. 18 Pittoni GM, Scatto A. Economics and outcome in the intensive care unit. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2009;22:232–6. 19 Moerer O et al. A German national prevalence study on the cost of intensive care: an evaluation from 51 intensive care units. Crit Care 2007;11:R69.