Timing of antibiotic treatment identifies distinct clinical presentations among patients presenting with suspected septic shock

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveRecent clinical guidelines for sepsis management emphasize immediate antibiotic initiation for suspected septic shock. Though hypotension is a high‐risk marker of sepsis severity, prior studies have not considered the precise timing of hypotension in relation to antibiotic initiation and how clinical characteristics and outcomes may differ. Our objective was to evaluate antibiotic initiation in relation to hypotension to characterize differences in sepsis presentation and outcomes in patients with suspected septic shock.MethodsAdults presenting to the emergency department (ED) June 2012–December 2018 diagnosed with sepsis (Sepsis‐III electronic health record [EHR] criteria) and hypotension (non‐resolving for ≥30 min, systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg) within 24 h. We categorized patients who received antibiotics before hypotension (“early”), 0–60 min after (“immediate”), and >60 min after (“late”) treatment.ResultsAmong 2219 patients, 55% received early treatment, 13% immediate, and 32% late. The late subgroup often presented to the ED with hypotension (median 0 min) but received antibiotics a median of 191 min post‐ED presentation. Clinical characteristics notable for this subgroup included higher prevalence of heart failure and liver disease (p < 0.05) and later onset of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria compared to early/immediate treatment subgroups (median 87 vs. 35 vs. 20 min, p < 0.0001). After adjustment, there was no difference in clinical outcomes among treatment subgroups.ConclusionsThere was significant heterogeneity in presentation and timing of antibiotic initiation for suspected septic shock. Patients with later treatment commonly had hypotension on presentation, had more hypotension‐associated comorbidities, and developed overt markers of infection (eg, SIRS) later. While these factors likely contribute to delays in clinician recognition of suspected septic shock, it may not impact sepsis outcomes.