An unexplained death at a Russian plague research institute has prompted international scrutiny. The incident raises questions about laboratory safety, transparent reporting, and infection prevention preparedness while the cause remains unconfirmed.
|Articles|January 17, 2014
High Volume of Severe Sepsis Patients May Result in Better Outcomes
Advertisement
A recent study led by Boston University School of Medicine (BUSM) shows that "practice may make perfect" when it comes to caring for patients with severe sepsis. The study showed that patients admitted to academic medical centers that care for more patients with severe sepsis have significantly lower mortality rates than patients cared for at academic medical centers with lower volumes of sepsis patients. Additionally, the superior outcomes at high volume centers were achieved at similar costs compared to the lower volume medical centers.
Published online in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, the study was led by Allan J. Walkey, MD, MSc, assistant professor of medicine, BUSM, and attending physician, pulmonary, critical care and allergy medicine, Boston Medical Center.
Analyzing data from academic hospitals across the country, provided by the University HealthSystem Consortium, the researchers identified 56,997 patients with severe sepsis who were admitted to 124 academic hospitals in 2011. The median length of stay for patients was 12.5 days and the median direct cost for each patient was $26,304.
Their data indicate that hospitals caring for more sepsis patients had a seven percent lower mortality rate than hospitals with lower volumes. The high volume medical centers had a 22 percent mortality rate while the lower volume hospitals had a 29 percent mortality rate.
"Given the lack of new drugs to treat severe sepsis, medical professionals must look at other ways to increase patient safety and positive outcomes, including the process of how we deliver care," says Walkey. "Our study results demonstrate that hospitals with more experience caring for patients with severe sepsis were able to achieve better outcomes than hospitals with less experience with sepsis, possibly due to better processes of care for patients with sepsis."
Funding for this study was provided in part by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute under grand award number K01HL116768 and the National Cancer Institute under grant award number K07 CA138772.
Source: Boston University School of MedicineÂ
Â
Advertisement
Related to this article
Behind every landmark in infection prevention, from antimicrobial stewardship guidelines to the COVID-19 town halls that reached flight attendants and teachers, is a generation of physician-scientists who led SHEA through crises, organizational change, and scientific breakthroughs. Infection Control Today traces 30 years of SHEA presidents and the lasting mark they left on the field.
Missing instruments and processing delays can strain OR–SPD relationships. At AORN 2026, John Kimsey, vice president of processing optimization and customer success for STERIS, discusses understanding root causes, exploring off-site reprocessing for ambulatory surgical centers, and using hands-on simulation to help surgical teams see sterile processing from a different perspective.
This week's coverage in Infection Control Today centered on a common thread: the systems, partnerships, and data that let infection prevention teams catch problems before patients are harmed.
UPMC’s genomic surveillance initiative earned national recognition for patient safety. Alexander Sundermann, DrPH, CIC, FAPIC, AL-CIP, explains how the award could help infection preventionists secure leadership support and sustainable funding for earlier outbreak detection.
Knowing the protocol is only the beginning. In The Clean Bite, Sherrie Busby explores how explaining the why, addressing staff concerns, and creating clear procedures can help dental teams make infection control part of everyday practice.
What might infection prevention rounds miss when visible conditions dominate the conversation? Tommy Davis, PhD, CMIP, a member of ICT's executive advisory board, makes the case for structured observations of clinical workflows, shared accountability, and greater attention to environmental services staff’s insights.
A proposed $27.7 million reduction in AHRQ funding raises questions about support for infection prevention research and implementation. Here is what the September 25 announcement identifies, as well as what remains unknown about specific IPC programs.
Advertisement
Advertisement