Abstract
AbstractThe development of a shared data infrastructure across health systems could improve research, clinical care, and health policy across a spectrum of diseases, including sepsis. Awareness of the potential value of such infrastructure has been heightened by COVID-19, as the lack of a real-time, interoperable data network impaired disease identification, mitigation, and eradication. The Sepsis on FHIR collaboration establishes a dynamic, federated, and interoperable system of sepsis data from 55 hospitals using 2 distinct inpatient electronic health record systems. Here we report on phase 1, a systematic review to identify clinical variables required to define sepsis and its subtypes to produce a concept mapping of elements onto Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR). Relevant papers described consensus sepsis definitions, provided criteria for sepsis, severe sepsis, septic shock, or detailed sepsis subtypes. Studies not written in English, published prior to 1970, or “grey” literature were prospectively excluded. We analyzed 55 manuscripts yielding 151 unique clinical variables. We then mapped variables to their corresponding US Core FHIR resources and specific code values. This work establishes the framework to develop a flexible infrastructure for sharing sepsis data, highlighting how FHIR could enable the extension of this approach to other important conditions relevant to public health.
Funder
Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | National Institutes of Health
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Information Management,Health Informatics,Computer Science Applications,Medicine (miscellaneous)
Reference89 articles.
1. Seymour, C. W. & Angus, D. C. Sepsis and septic shock. In Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine, 20e (eds. Ameson, J. et al.) (McGraw-Hill, 2018).
2. Rudd, K. E. et al. Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990-2017: analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet 395, 200–211 (2020).
3. Rhodes, A. et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: International guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016. Intensive Care Med. 43, 304–377 (2017).
4. Angus, D. C. et al. A framework for the development and interpretation of different sepsis definitions and clinical criteria. Crit. Care Med. 44, e113–e121 (2016).
5. Cohen, J. V. J. et al. Sepsis: a roadmap for future research. Lancet Infect. Dis. 15, 581–614 (2015).
Cited by
15 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献