Cited by 1,059Sepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersVitamin C and Antioxidants Research

Enhancing Recovery From Sepsis: A Review

Open access
Prescott, Hallie C., Angus, Derek C.·2018·JAMA

Abstract

Importance: Survival from sepsis has improved in recent years, resulting in an increasing number of patients who have survived sepsis treatment. Current sepsis guidelines do not provide guidance on posthospital care or recovery. Observations: Each year, more than 19 million individuals develop sepsis, defined as a life-threatening acute organ dysfunction secondary to infection. Approximately 14 million survive to hospital discharge and their prognosis varies. Half of patients recover, one-third die during the following year, and one-sixth have severe persistent impairments. Impairments include development of an average of 1 to 2 new functional limitations (eg, inability to bathe or dress independently), a 3-fold increase in prevalence of moderate to severe cognitive impairment (from 6.1% before hospitalization to 16.7% after hospitalization), and a high prevalence of mental health problems, including anxiety (32% of patients who survive), depression (29%), or posttraumatic stress disorder (44%). About 40% of patients are rehospitalized within 90 days of discharge, often for conditions that are potentially treatable in the outpatient setting, such as infection (11.9%) and exacerbation of heart failure (5.5%). Compared with patients hospitalized for other diagnoses, those who survive sepsis (11.9%) are at increased risk of recurrent infection than matched patients (8.0%) matched patients (P < .001), acute renal failure (3.3% vs 1.2%, P < .001), and new cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] range, 1.1-1.4). Reasons for deterioration of health after sepsis are multifactorial and include accelerated progression of preexisting chronic conditions, residual organ damage, and impaired immune function. Characteristics associated with complications after hospital discharge for sepsis treatment are not fully understood but include both poorer presepsis health status, characteristics of the acute septic episode (eg, severity of infection, host response to infection), and quality of hospital treatment (eg, timeliness of initial sepsis care, avoidance of treatment-related harms). Although there is a paucity of clinical trial evidence to support specific postdischarge rehabilitation treatment, experts recommend referral to physical therapy to improve exercise capacity, strength, and independent completion of activities of daily living. This recommendation is supported by an observational study involving 30 000 sepsis survivors that found that referral to rehabilitation within 90 days was associated with lower risk of 10-year mortality compared with propensity-matched controls (adjusted HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.97, P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In the months after hospital discharge for sepsis, management should focus on (1) identifying new physical, mental, and cognitive problems and referring for appropriate treatment, (2) reviewing and adjusting long-term medications, and (3) evaluating for treatable conditions that commonly result in hospitalization, such as infection, heart failure, renal failure, and aspiration. For patients with poor or declining health prior to sepsis who experience further deterioration after sepsis, it may be appropriate to focus on palliation of symptoms.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2017.17687

Cites

93 of 93 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Living in neighborhoods with low socioeconomic status is associated with worse outcomes.

    “Additionally, living in neighborhoods with low SES is associated with an increased risk of sepsis (575), community-acquired bacteremia (575) and death from bacteremia (576) and worse outcomes (577).”

    From Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2021. (2021) · cites this paper as [577]

    The Clinical Sequelae section describes worse outcomes after sepsis, including reduced quality of life, but does not link them to neighborhood socioeconomic status. Searches for neighborhood socioeconomic status, income, and poverty found no passage addressing that association. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Almost 40% of sepsis survivors are re-hospitalised within 3 months, often for preventable conditions, contributing to increased healthcare costs.

    “Almost 40% of sepsis survivors are re-hospitalised within 3 months, often for preventable conditions [580], contributing to increased healthcare costs [581].”
  • Sepsis survivors are at increased risk for recurrent infection, AKI, and new cardiovascular events compared to patients hospitalised for other diagnoses.

    “In addition, sepsis survivors are at increased risk for recurrent infection, AKI and new cardiovascular events compared to patients hospitalised for other diagnoses [580].”
  • There are a growing number of online resources and informational brochures regarding post intensive care and post-sepsis syndrome.

    “There are a growing number of online resources and informational brochures regarding “post intensive care” / “post-sepsis syndrome”
  • Physical rehabilitation programmes have benefit in related populations such as older patients with cognitive impairment, patients following stroke or traumatic brain injury.

    “Nonetheless, based on their strong rationale, and benefit in related populations [580] (e.g., older patients with cognitive impairment, patients following stroke or traumatic brain injury), we suggest referral to rehabilitation programmes in survivors of sepsis.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Prescott, H. C., & Angus, D. C.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
Venue
JAMA
Published
2018-01-02
Volume
319
Issue
1
Pages
62
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2782135811
Cited by
1,059
References
93
Citations by year
2026: 143 · 2025: 149 · 2024: 161 · 2023: 142 · 2022: 124 · 2021: 135 · 2020: 103 · 2019: 67 · 2018: 32
FWCI
65.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM097471, K08GM115859)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Vitamin C and Antioxidants Research
Keywords
sepsis survivors, post-hospital care, post-discharge rehabilitation, physiotherapy referral, functional recovery, cognitive impairment, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety, hospital readmission, recurrent infections, acute kidney injury, cardiovascular events, activities of daily living, sepsis severity, immune dysfunction, hospital quality of care, sepsis management guidelines
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adult, Mental Disorders, Cognition Disorders, Hospitalization, Humans, Sepsis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review