About this trial
Sepsis is a life-threatening reaction to an infection. It can begin while a person is already in the hospital for some other reason. Sepsis that starts in the hospital is often recognized late, and treatment can be delayed. On the general wards at the study hospital, patients who develop sepsis may benefit from receiving earlier treatments. Patients who are getting sicker but do not have sepsis also might benefit.
The hospital's electronic health record already runs an automated sepsis screening tool in the background. The tool gives each patient a score that rises when the record shows possible signs of sepsis. Today that score can be seen by staff, but it does not prompt any particular action.
This study tests whether connecting the score to a rapid bedside response improves how patients do. When a patient's score crosses a set level, the electronic health record sends an alert to that patient's bedside nurse. The nurse can bring in the Critical Care Activation Team, a group of critical care clinicians available at all hours. If the nurse does not respond within a short window, the team is paged automatically. The team comes to the bedside, examines the patient, and can order tests and treatments directly, including antibiotics. The patient's regular medical team is told at the same time and continues taking care of the patient with this additional assistance.
The study compares this alert-and-response pathway against the care the hospital provides today. Every adult on the participating units is included automatically when their score crosses the set level. A computer assigns each patient to one of two groups. In one group the alert is sent and the response pathway begins. In the other group the alert is not sent, and care goes on exactly as it does at the hospital now.
The main measure is each patient's condition five days after the score crossed the set level, sorted into five levels: discharged from the hospital, in the hospital without organ support, in the hospital with organ support, in intensive care, or died. The study also looks at how quickly antibiotics were started, how many days patients spend alive and out of the hospital, and whether the pathway leads to antibiotic use that was not needed.
Patients are not asked to do anything and are not seen by the study team. No extra visits, tests, or procedures are added beyond the tests the response team may order as part of ordinary care. All study information comes from the medical record. Both groups receive care that is within accepted practice, and asking each patient for permission ahead of time would change the very thing being studied. For those reasons the study is conducted under a waiver of informed consent granted by the hospital's institutional review board, and the hospital notifies patients about its use of these tools through its general admission materials.
Eligibility criteria
This trial does not accept healthy volunteersQualifiers
Age 18 years or older
Admitted to a participating study unit at the time of the qualifying event. Participating units are non-cancer medicine wards (hospitalist, resident, and family medicine), general surgery.
Sepsis prediction score computed by the electronic health record crosses the pre-specified study threshold at any point during the admission
Disqualifiers
Comfort-focused or hospice goals of care documented at the time of threshold crossing. Do-not-resuscitate or do-not-intubate status alone is not an exclusion; participants with these orders are eligible, and the responding team tailors its response to documented goals of care
Already receiving intensive-care-level treatment while boarding on a ward unit at the time of threshold crossing
Pre-existing order declining rapid response team activation (expected to be exceedingly rare)
Trial design
Parallel
Treatments tested in this trial
Algorithm-triggered sepsis alert with structured critical care team activation
Other interventionWhen a commercially deployed sepsis prediction score crosses a pre-specified threshold, an electronic health record alert is delivered to the assigned bedside nurse, presenting structured response options including declining activation with a captured reason. Serum lactate and complete blood count are ordered automatically. If the nurse does not respond within a pre-specified timeout window, a 24-hour critical care rapid response team is paged automatically. The team evaluates the patient at the bedside, may place diagnostic and therapeutic orders directly including antibiotics, and documents the encounter in a structured note. The primary team is notified simultaneously and retains clinical authority. The prediction score runs identically in both arms and is not modified by the study.
Treatment groups
Trial outcomes
Primary outcomes
Clinical status at day 5 on a five-level ordinal scale
Each participant is assigned one ordinal clinical state at 120 hours after the qualifying algorithm threshold crossing. The scale has five mutually exclusive, ordered levels: 1 = discharged alive; 2 = hospitalized on a ward without organ support; 3 = hospitalized on a ward with organ support; 4 = intensive care unit; 5 = dead. Lower values indicate better status. Organ support is any of: vasopressor infusion, invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive positive pressure ventilation for acute respiratory failure, high-flow nasal cannula at FiO2 of 0.4 or greater, or renal replacement therapy started after threshold crossing. State is derived by rule from electronic health record data, identically in both arms, using admission-discharge-transfer records for location, an organ-support pipeline, and hospitalization records for mortality. State is ascertained at the closest clean data snapshot to the 120-hour mark. Discharge to hospice is coded as state 5.
Secondary outcomes
Clinical status at day 14 on a five-level ordinal scale
Each participant is assigned one ordinal clinical state at 336 hours after the qualifying algorithm threshold crossing, using the same five-level scale as the primary outcome: 1 = discharged alive; 2 = hospitalized on a ward without organ support; 3 = hospitalized on a ward with organ support; 4 = intensive care unit; 5 = dead. Lower values indicate better status. Organ support is any of: vasopressor infusion, invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive positive pressure ventilation for acute respiratory failure, high-flow nasal cannula at FiO2 of 0.4 or greater, or renal replacement therapy started after threshold crossing. State is derived by rule from electronic health record data, identically in both arms. Discharge to hospice is coded as state 5. This measure assesses persistence of any effect observed at day 5.
Days alive and free of organ support through day 28
Number of days within the first 28 days after the qualifying algorithm threshold crossing on which the participant was alive and free of organ support, defined as being in the "ward without organ support" state or better (levels 1 or 2 of the primary ordinal scale). Organ support is any of: vasopressor infusion, invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive positive pressure ventilation for acute respiratory failure, high-flow nasal cannula at FiO2 of 0.4 or greater, or renal replacement therapy started after threshold crossing. Death at any point within 28 days scores 0. Range 0 to 28 days; higher values indicate better outcome. Derived by rule from electronic health record data, identically in both arms.
Time from threshold crossing to first new antibiotic administration
Hours from the qualifying algorithm threshold crossing to administration of the first new antibiotic, defined as an antibiotic not already being administered at the time of crossing. Analyzed as time to event, with death and hospital discharge without a new antibiotic treated as competing events. Participants are followed for this measure until first new antibiotic administration, hospital discharge, or death, through day 28. All participants who cross the threshold are included in the denominator regardless of whether an antibiotic was ever ordered, so that participants who die or are discharged early are retained rather than excluded. Derived from the medication administration record and order entry timestamps, identically in both arms.
Completion of all one- and three-hour sepsis bundle elements within one hour
Proportion of participants for whom all elements of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign one-hour bundle were completed within one and three hours of the qualifying algorithm threshold crossing. Elements are ascertained by rule from electronic health record data, identically in both arms.
Other outcomes
Time from alert to critical care activation team bedside evaluation
Minutes from delivery of the electronic health record alert to documented bedside evaluation by the critical care team, derived from paging records and the structured team note. This measure is computable only for participants in the intervention arm, because the alert, the page, and the team note exist only when an alert is generated. It is reported as an implementation fidelity measure for that arm rather than as a between-arm comparison.
Distribution of bedside nurse responses to the alert
Distribution of bedside nurse responses to the alert across the available structured options, including declining activation with a captured reason, requesting team activation, and automatic activation following an unanswered alert. Reported as proportions per calendar month across the 18-month randomization period. Computable only for the intervention arm, because alerts are not generated in the control arm. Interpreted as an indicator of how nurses weigh alert salience against the clinical picture; a high decline rate may reflect clinical judgment, alert fatigue, or both.
Proportion of team-initiated orders modified by the primary team
Proportion of orders placed by the critical care rapid response team that were modified or discontinued by the primary team before the required four-hour reassessment, with reason captured in the structured team note. Computable only for the intervention arm. Reported as a governance and implementation fidelity measure.
Time to first new antibiotic among control-arm participants, compared with pre-launch baseline
Median hours from the qualifying algorithm threshold crossing to first new antibiotic administration among control-arm participants, summarized per calendar quarter across the 18-month randomization period and compared with the institutional pre-launch baseline for the same units. This measure probes whether uniform staff education and general awareness of the study shift care for participants whose alert was suppressed. A secular trend toward faster antibiotics in the control arm would indicate an attention effect not attributable to the alert-and-response pathway itself.
Sponsors and contacts
Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.
Patricks Lyons
Lead sponsor
Oregon Health and Science University
Sponsor institution
This trial is not recruiting at the moment. You can still explore other options: