Cited by 7Sepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentElectronic Health Records SystemsHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring

2019 John M. Eisenberg Patient Safety and Quality Awards: SPOTting Sepsis to Save Lives: A Nationwide Computer Algorithm for Early Detection of Sepsis

Perlin, Jonathan B., Jackson, Edmund, Hall, Cody, Mindick, Adam, Berberich, Garrick, Korwek, Kimberly, Poland, Russell E., Roach, Jonathon +2 more·2020·The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety

Abstract

Background In recognition of the potential of data to drive care and the need for early identification of patients with sepsis, HCA Healthcare developed an automated sepsis detection algorithm-SPOT (Sepsis Prediction and Optimization of Therapy). The algorithm was deployed at scale and served as a mechanism to reduce the time to detection and improve sepsis mortality in 173 hospitals across the United States. Methods The SPOT algorithm was designed as a rules-based detection of defined criteria that would interpret available electronic and basic laboratory data in near real time. Working from an organizational recognition of the need to construct a national clinical data warehouse to allow for the aggregation and analysis of data streams, HCA Healthcare designed and deployed SPOT and delivered the alert from the algorithm to the bedside to initiate existing clinical workflows for patients with sepsis. Results SPOT improved the timeliness of sepsis detection by providing alerts when signals of sepsis become available, triggering initiation of sepsis screens. This gave an advantage of about six hours over the legacy practice of sepsis screening at shift change. When deployed alongside existing sepsis improvement initiatives, SPOT was associated with an acceleration of improvement in mortality-particularly in the not-present-on-admission (NPOA) septic shock population, the patients at greatest risk for mortality. This population had seen little improvement with prior initiatives…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jcjq.2020.04.006

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Perlin, J. B., Jackson, E., Hall, C., Mindick, A., Berberich, G., Korwek, K., Poland, R. E., Roach, J., Novak, A., & Guy, J. S.
Corresponding author
Guy, Jeffrey S.
Venue
The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-07
Volume
46
Issue
7
Pages
381-391
ISSN
1553-7250 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3016654280
Cited by
7
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1
FWCI
0.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Healthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Keywords
sepsis, early detection, electronic health records, sepsis mortality, septic shock, clinical data warehouse
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Awards and Prizes, Computers, Humans, United States, Sepsis, Patient Safety

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