Prehospital Antibiotics Against Sepsis Trial
Prehospital Antibiotics Against Sepsis Trial
Sepsis is one of the most frequent reasons for referral to emergency departments (EDs)
 worldwide. The incidence of sepsis is likely to rise in the upcoming years. Sepsis has a
 tendency to become more serious when left untreated with a high mortality rate, exceeding
 even those of myocardial infarction and stroke. Therefore, much effort has been put in to
 start with appropriate therapy as early as possible. Early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) in
 the emergency department with fluid resuscitation, administration of
 vasopressors/vasodilators and intravenous antibiotics in patients with severe sepsis and
 septic shock has indeed decreased mortality substantially. Emergency medical services (EMS)
 personnel have already made a significant difference in improving care for patients with
 acute coronary syndrome, multiple trauma and stroke. Patients with severe sepsis or septic
 shock could also benefit greatly from timely pre-hospital care. Earlier recognition and
 initiation of treatment by EMS personnel may improve survival even more.

 Interestingly, the first hour of ED presentation seems to be the most critical hour.
 Administration of antibiotics and fluid resuscitation in the pre-hospital setting will reduce
 the time to administration substantially. In adults, to the best of our knowledge, no studies
 on the effect of pre-hospital administration of antibiotics have been performed. In children
 with meningitis, some uncontrolled studies show contradictory results, most probably due to
 bias by severity. We propose a non-blinded randomised multicentre clinical trial study on the
 efficacy of early, pre-hospital intravenous administration of broad spectrum antibiotics
 (ceftriaxone), which are effective against a wide variety of infectious pathogens that cause
 most common community-acquired infections) in patients referred to the ED with suspected
 severe sepsis or septic shock.

 Objective: To evaluate whether early, pre-hospital administration of antibiotics, together
 with training of ambulance personnel in recognizing and initiating treatment reduces 28-day
 mortality in patients referred to the ED with suspected severe sepsis or septic shock

 Study design: Non-blinded randomized multicentre clinical trial nested within a stepped wedge
 design

 Study population: All patients above the age of 18 years, with suspected severe sepsis or
 septic shock and transferred to the ED by ambulance, are eligible for study inclusion

 Intervention: prehospital antibiotics (ceftriaxone 2000 mg intravenously)

 Main study parameters/endpoints: 28-day mortality, hospital length of stay, admission to
 intensive or medium care unit (ICU/MC), time to administration of antibiotics. Follow up of
 one year. QoL after one month after discharge.
Introduction Sepsis is one of the most common and life-threatening diseases in the world,
 causing more deaths than AIDS, breast cancer and prostate cancer put together (8-10). Despite
 the fact that the mortality of sepsis is ten times higher than myocardial infarction and to
 five times higher than stroke, relatively little attention is given to sepsis (23-25). In
 recent years successful clinical care management pathways have been developed for patients
 suffering from a myocardial infarction, stroke or a trauma. Even though there is strong
 evidence in scientific literature to support the need for a series of time-dependent actions,
 for sepsis this is still not the case.

 On 13 September 2012, the first ' World Sepsis Day ' was held with as main objective : 'to
 increase awareness for sepsis as a potentially lethal condition, which should be considered
 as a medical emergency ' (26). Prompt recognition and treatment are extremely important for
 improving survival, while patients who survive sepsis can still continue to suffer from
 physical or psychological symptoms. The likelihood and severity of these complications
 depends on a number of factors including the severity of sepsis and the length of stay in
 hospital stay and in ICU.

 Definition Sepsis is defined as a proven or strongly suspected infection that is associated
 with a 'systemic inflammatory response syndrome ' (SIRS) (29,30). SIRS exists if at least two
 of the four criteria are met: abnormal body temperature, increased heart rate (over 90 beats
 per minute), increased respiratory rate (more than 20 per minute) and an abnormal white blood
 cell (WBC) count. There are different degrees of sepsis on the basis of severity. Sepsis may
 develop to severe sepsis or septic shock, if treatment is not timely initiated. Severe sepsis
 is defined as sepsis with failure of one or more organ systems and septic shock and severe
 sepsis with persistent low blood pressures despite adequate resuscitation. In particular
 organ failure and shock cause high mortality.

 In the Netherlands, more than 10,000 patients with sepsis are admitted to a hospital
 annually, with an average length of stay (LOS) of 15 days. The medical costs being
 approximately $ 20,000 per person, the total cost of severe sepsis in the Netherlands is
 estimated at nearly 170 million per year (1-3).

 Mortality can be very high if sepsis is not timely or adequately treated, especially among
 the vulnerable elderly population. The mortality rates vary from 20 to 60 percent, depending
 on the age and other underlying diseases such as diabetes and cancer. Even in the VUmc the
 mortality rates are almost up to 40%. Multiorgan failure due to sepsis and septic shock is
 the leading cause of death in the ICU (31,32). The incidence of sepsis has increased in
 recent years and it is expected that this trend will continue, partly due to the aging
 population and partly because of increasing numbers of immune-compromised patients who are
 highly susceptible to all kinds of (opportunistic) infections.

 Early Goal Directed Therapy (EGDT)

 The advent of antibiotics was a major step forward in the treatment of sepsis, causing a
 mortality decrease by approximately 25 percent (33,34). It is noteworthy that in the decades
 hereafter very little progress in the treatment of sepsis was made, until the introduction of
 the 'Early goal directed therapy (EGDT). A study by Rivers and colleagues (4) shows that by
 applying EGDT during the first six hours after detection of sepsis, an absolute mortality
 reduction of almost 16% is achieved. This EGDT consists of a number of interventions, which
 have the purpose to optimize hemodynamics as quickly as possible by means of tight monitoring
 of arterial / venous pressures and oxygen saturation. The cornerstones of this treatment
 include aggressive fluid resuscitation, administration of vasopressors, giving protective
 ventilation and administration of broad-spectrum antibiotics. Several large clinical trials
 have confirmed the value of EGDT with sometimes even greater mortality reduction (35-38).

 Survival Sepsis Campaign Timely recognition and rapid treatment of sepsis appears crucial,
 but recognizing sepsis still remains a challenge: the symptoms are often non-specific and
 various other diseases might fit as well. Therefore the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign" (SSC) was
 launched in 2003 (13), with the aim of creating awareness for sepsis for better recognition
 and treatment of sepsis to improve the prognosis. Through this campaign a directive was
 developed wherein a somewhat modified form of the EGDT was incorporated. This directive also
 states that broad-spectrum antibiotics should be administered as soon as possible, preferably
 within one hour after arrival in the emergency room.

 Despite extensive attention in the last few years (major campaigns of VMS) in shortening time
 to administration of antibiotics (the so called "onset to needle time"), there are still
 delays in the start up of antibiotic therapy in the emergency department (ED) (6-7). EDs are
 still not functioning optimally, with waiting times sometimes exceeding 6 hours. This is also
 the conclusion of the report: 'Haastige spoed niet overal goed' from 2004 (Inspectie der
 Volksgezondheid). Herein EDs in the Netherlands are described as the weakest link in the
 emergency care, and in addition according to this report, little progress in the quality of
 care in the emergency department was made from 1994 to 2004. After much effort and
 recommendations, progress was made in the last few years but not sufficiently enough (see
 report '' Ziekenhuizen goed op weg met implementatie normen voor afdelingen spoedeisende
 hulp' "). Our study will therefore be able to contribute to the improvement of both
 in-hospital and pre-hospital acute care chain. Not only will we save costly time in the trip
 till reaching the hospital, but moreover we will also overcome (potential) delays in the
 emergency department by starting therapy in the ambulance. Delays which can amount from one
 to even six hours.

 Why antibiotics should be administered early? The first hour of presentation in the emergency
 room, also known as the 'Golden Hour' seems to be the most critical one in the treatment of a
 septic patient. Retrospective studies have shown that rapid antibiotic administration could
 mean better chance of survival as well as a reduction in the chance of lasting physical
 problems. Moreover, rapid intervention may shorten hospital stay as well and even prevent the
 need for ICU admission (1-5). In daily practice however, implementation of the SSC directives
 is not always easy, and there may be several reasons to delay the start of treatment (6.15).
 The so-called 'onset to needle time' can be as high as several hours. A recent pilot study in
 the VUMC showed that 25% of patients had to wait longer than three hours at the emergency
 department before treatment was initiated with antibiotic therapy (16). Not only in the pilot
 study of our university but also in a retrospective study conducted by Kumar and colleagues
 only 32.5% of the patients received the first gift within the first 3 hours (6) Any delay in
 the administration of antibiotics, causes an increase in mortality rate with almost 8 percent
 per hour!(6).

 The later the treatment is initiated, the greater the chance of multiorgan failure. Besides
 higher mortality-rates, multiorgan failure is directly correlated with more complications,
 longer hospital stay and higher use of costly healthcare facilities (10). Therefore it is
 probably important that the onset to needle time is as short as possible.

 Moreover in the long term sepsis can cause much damage (17-20). Patients who survive sepsis
 often suffer for months of complications that arise during or after a prolonged
 hospitalization in intensive care (eg. critical illness neuropathy, problems with speech or
 swallowing by prolonged ventilation). The quality of life can also sharply deteriorate after
 experiencing sepsis (18).

 An important point to note is that all the studies which state that early antibiotic
 administration is associated with improved survival, were retrospective and uncontrolled
 studies, making occurrence of selection bias probable. One of the reasons why the doctors may
 not be very keen on initiating the antibiotics early (before a definitive diagnosis is made)
 may be the fact that they consider current evidence insufficient and incomplete. In order to
 investigate the optimal timing of antibiotic administration, prospective randomized
 controlled studies should be performed at the emergency department. However, it may be
 unethical to randomize patients and delay initiation of antibiotic therapy at the ED. An
 alternative and perhaps a better option is to perform a prospective randomized trial in the
 pre-hospital setting, i.e in the ambulances. In current practice, initiation of antibiotic
 therapy starts at the emergency department (ED) and not in the ambulances. Pre-hospital
 antibiotic administration on the one hand may be a solution to avoid delays in treatment at
 the ED and on the other hand a way to finally perform a randomised trial to examine the
 effect of onset to needle time on clinical endpoints such as improved survival, shorter
 hospital stay and better quality of life.

 Pre-hospital care, even in sepsis? Ambulance personnel have already made a significant
 contribution in improving care for patients with acute coronary syndrome, stroke and multiple
 trauma (42, 43). Patients with severe sepsis or septic shock can also benefit from early
 pre-hospital care (44). Pre-hospital care is the initial medical care, which is given by
 ambulance personnel once they reach the patient. Since time plays a crucial role in the
 treatment of sepsis, early recognition and initiation of treatment by the ambulance personnel
 may help to reduce mortality. The provision of pre-hospital care is associated with a shorter
 start-up time of EGDT and antibiotic therapy in the hospital (44-47). In addition, it appears
 that this pre-hospital care leads to quicker achievement of an optimal blood pressure, and
 oxygen saturation. Therefore, it can be expected that by the administration of broad-spectrum
 antibiotics in the ambulance, the survival of sepsis can be improved by greatly reducing the
 time to the administration of the necessary antibiotics.

 To date no randomized controlled trials on the effect of antibiotics in the pre-hospital
 settings on adults have been conducted. In children with meningitis some uncontrolled studies
 have been done. In the studies by Strang and Cartwright (50,51), a clear beneficial effect on
 survival is seen after pre-hospital administration of antibiotics by general practitioners.
 Hamden and Sorensen (52.53) on the contrary showed that administration of antibiotics in the
 pre-hospital setting was associated with worse outcomes. A possible explanation for these
 divergent results is that there occurred a strong selection bias. The group of children
 receiving pre-hospital antibiotics could be in a more critical stage of illness.

 A definitive answer to the question whether administration of antibiotics in pre-hospital
 setting is effective, can only be obtained by a prospective randomized controlled trial. In
 this form of study selection bias can be avoided.

 However, recognition of sepsis is difficult, Suffoletto et al investigated how accurately the
 ambulance personnel in Pennsylvania were able to recognize a serious infection, the negative
 predictive value was 93%. In contrast, 69% of the patients with a severe infection were
 missed (8). A pilot study in Maastricht showed (54), that this situation can probably be
 extrapolated to the Netherlands as well: a large proportion of patients with septic shock was
 in fact not recognized as such and transported with a B-ride (low priority ride). The
 information transfer is hereby often incomplete or not entirely accurate (from the general
 practitioner to the ambulance personnel/hospital or from the ambulance to the ED) causing
 substantial delays in initiating treatment. Therefore, much can be gained by training
 ambulance personnel and getting them skilled enough in recognizing sepsis and improving the
 transfer of information.

 Research Consortium

 Through an intensive collaboration of some major Dutch medical centres and ambulance
 services, a research consortium has been established to start a nationwide project in the
 form of a multicentre randomized trial: the PHANTASi trial (PreHospital ANTibiotics Against
 Sepsi) This consortium has a joint goal namely evaluating the effect of early administration
 of antibiotics in patients with suspected sepsis in the pre-hospital setting compared to that
 with the regular treatment. Our hypothesis in this study is that administration of
 antibiotics in the pre-hospital setting will significantly shorten the time to administration
 of antibiotics, which subsequently will lead to improved survival. In addition, the
 pre-hospital administration of antibiotics shortens hospital stay which, simultaneously has a
 favorable effect on the cost and quality of life (QoL).

 Importance of this project Sepsis is a major global health problem with an increasing
 incidence and high mortality rate. While in the past decades, modern medicine has become
 increasingly sophisticated, and the treatment and care around diseases, such as heart failure
 and cancer is greatly improved, treatment of sepsis remains a problem with a high mortality.
 Early administration of antibiotics in critically ill patients with sepsis could possibly
 change that. It is not clear what the best time of administration should be, because how
 early is early? Moreover, in practice it often happens that the time limits are not, or not
 sufficiently monitored closely, whilst increasing the risk of death.

 Moreover, the treatment of an acutely ill patient requires teamwork and an optimally
 functioning acute-care chain. Through this project it will be possible to investigate whether
 pre-hospital antibiotic therapy leads to better outcomes for this category of seriously ill
 and vulnerable patients.

 REFERENCES

 1. van Gestel et al. Prevalence and incidence of severe sepsis in Dutch intensive care
 units. Critical Care August 2004, Vold 8 No 4

 2. Roedig A (RIVM). Ziekenhuisopnamen sepsis en pyemie 2001-2004. In: Volksgezondheid
 Toekomst Verkenning, Nationaal Kompas Volksgezondheid. Bilthoven: RIVM

 3. J. Bakker, et al Sepsis, een gecompliceerd syndroom met belangrijke medische en
 maatschappelijke consequentiesNedTijdschrGeneeskd. 2004;148:975-8

 4. Rivers E, et al. Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and
 septic shock. NEJM. 2001; 345(19):1368-77.

 5. Gaieski et al. Impact of time to antibiotics on survival in patients with severe sepsis
 or septic shock in whom early goal-directed therapy was initiated in the emergency
 department. Crit Care Med. 2010 Apr;38(4):1045-53.

 6. Kumar et al. Duration of hypotension prior to initiation of effective antimicrobial
 therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med.
 2006;34(6):1593

 7. Vegting et al. Analysing completion times in an academic emergency department:
 coordination of care is the weakest link. The Netherlands Journal of Medicine. 2011 Sep;
 69(9):392-398

 8. Angus DC, et al. Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United State: Analysis of
 incidence, outcome, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med 2001;29(7)1303

 9. Martin GS, et al. The epidemiology of sepsis in the United States from 1979 through
 2000.NEJM. 2003;348:1546-54.

 10. Vincent JL, Set al. Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients Investigators. Sepsis in
 European intensive care units: results of the SOAP study.Crit Care Med. 2006
 Feb;34(2):344-53.

 11. Kumar G et al . Nationwide trends of severe sepsis in the 21st century (2000-2007).
 Chest, 2011. 140(5): p. 1223

 12. http://www.vmszorg.nl/10-Themas/Sepsis

 13. Dellinger RP, et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management
 of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008. Crit Care Med 2008; 36:296 -327.

 14. Tromp et al. The effects of implementation of the surviving sepsis Campaign in the
 Netherlands

 15. O'Neill et al. Early goal directed therapy (EGDT( for severe sepsis/septic shock: which
 components of treatment are more difficult to implement in a community based emergency
 department?. The journal of Emergency Med.Vol 42, No5

 16. Wetenschappelijk stage: S.B van der Meer, P.W.B. Nanayakkara, E.Schrijver Diagnostics of
 patients with sepsis or septic shock at the Emergency Department: Factors contributing
 to the delay of timely Administration of Antibiotics. Departments of Emergency Medicine
 and Internal Medicine, VU University Medical Centre Amsterdam, The Netherlands

 17. Lazosky et al. Quality of life after septic illness. Journal of Critical Care (2010) 25
 406-412

 18. Hofhuis et al. The impact of severe sepsis on Health-Related quality of life: A long
 term follow-up study. Vol 107. No 6 Dec 2008

 19. Iwashyna TJ, Ely EW, Smith DM, et al.: Long-term cognitive impairment and functional
 disability among survivors of severe sepsis. JAMA, 304: 1787-1794, 2010.

 20. Oeyen et al. Quality of life after intensive care: A systematic review of the literature
 . Crit Care Med 2010 Vol 38. No 12

 21. Siddiqui S, Razzak J. Early versus late pre-intensive care unit admission broad spectrum
 antibiotics for severe sepsis in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010,
 Issue 10.

 22. http://acuteinterne.medconinternational.com

 23. Yeh RW et al Population trends in the incidence and outcomes of acute myocardial
 infarction. N Engl J Med, 2010. 362(23): p. 2155-65.

 24. Feigin et al, ; Worldwide stroke incidence and early case fatality reporten in 56
 population based studies: a systematic review.

 25. Ron Daniels, Surviving the first hours in sepsis: getting the basics right (an
 intensivist's perspective) J Antimicrob Chemother 2011; 66 Suppl 2: ii11-ii23

 26. http://world-sepsis-day.org

 27. Rattray JE, Johnston M, Wildsmith JA. Predictors of emotional outcomes of intensive
 care. Anaesthesia 2005;60:1085-92.

 28. Hall MJ et al, Inpatient care for septicemia or sepsis: A challenge for patients ands
 hospitals. NCHS data brief, no 62, Hyattsville, MD: National center for Health
 statistics, 2011

 29. Levy M et al. 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference.
 Crit Care Med 2003;31(4):1250-56

 30. Bone RC. Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of
 innovative therapies in sepsis. Chest 1992;101:1644.

 31. Balk RA. Pathogenesis and management of multiple organ dysfunction or failure in severe
 sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Clin. 2000;16:337-52, vii.

 32. Mayr VD et al. Causes of death and determinants of outcome in critically ill patients
 .Crit Care. 2006;10(6) :R154

 33. Anand Kumar, Optimizing Antimicrobial Therapy in sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Clin
 25 (2009) 733-751.

 34. Hemminki E, Paakkulainen A. Effect of antibiotics on mortality from infectious diseases
 in Sweden and Finland. Am J Public Health 1976;66:1180-4.

 35. Sivayoham et al. Outcomes from implementing early goal-directed therapy for severe
 sepsis and septic shock: a 4 year observational cohort study. EJEM 2012, Vol 19 No 4

 36. Rivers et al, Early interventions in severe sepsis and septic shock: a review of the
 evidence one decade later. Minerva Anestiol.2012; 78:712-2

 37. Shapiro et al. A blueprint for a sepsis protocol. Acad Emerg Med April 2005, Vol.12, No
 4

 38. Jones AE et al. The effect of a quantitative resuscitation strategy on mortality in
 patients with sepsis: a meta-analysis. Crit Care Med 2008; 36: 2734-2739

 39. hutchison

 40. Barlow et al. Reducing door to antibiotic time in community-acquired pneumonia:
 controlled before and after evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis. Thorax. 2007;
 (62 (1): 67-74

 41. vanTuijn et al. Reduction of the onset to needle time for administration of antibiotics
 in patients with a severe infection: a tailored intervention project.Neth. Journal of
 Medicine, march 2010, Vol.68 no 3

 42. Ghosh and Pepe, 2009 The critical care cascade: a systems approach. Current opinion in
 Critical Care, 15:279-283

 43. Robson et al 2009 Sepsis: a need for prehospital intervention?.Emerg Med J, 26:535-538

 44. Seymour et al, 2011. Understanding of sepsis among emergency medical services: a survey
 study. The Journal of Emergency Medicine, 1-12

 45. Studnek et al, 2012. The impact of emergency medical services on the ED care of severe
 sepsis. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 30: 51-56

 46. Band et al, 2011. Arriving by Emergency Medical Services improves time to treatment
 endpoints for patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Academic Emergency Medicine,
 18:934-940

 47. Seymour et al,Out-of-hospital fluid in severe sepsis: effect on early resuscitation in
 the emergency department. 2010. Prehospital Emergency Care, 14:145-152

 48. Proulx et al. Delays in the administration of antibiotics are associated with mortality
 from adult acute bacterial meningitis. Q J Med 2005; 98:291-298

 49. Miner et al. Presentation, time to antibitotics and mortality of patients with bacterial
 meningitis at an urban county medical center. J of Emergency Med. Vol 21. No4,
 pp387-392, 2001

 50. Cartwright K, Strang J, Gossain S, Begg N. Early treatment of meningococcal disease. BMJ
 1992; 305(6856):774.

 51. Strang JR, Pugh EJ. Meningococcal infections: reducing the case fatality rate by giving
 penicillin before admission to hospital. BMJ 1992;305:141-3. (18 July.)

 52. Sorensen HT, Nielsen GL, Schonheyder HC, Steffensen FH, Hansen I, Sabroe S et al.
 Outcome of pre-hospital antibiotic treatment of meningococcal disease. J Clin Epidemiol
 1998; 51(9):717-721.

 53. Harnden A, Ninis N, Thompson M, Perera R, Levin M, Mant D et al. Parenteral penicillin
 for children with meningococcal disease before hospital admission: case-control study.
 BMJ 2006; 332(7553):1295-1298

 54. Groenewoudt M, Roest AA, Leijten FM, Stassen PM ; .Eur J Emerg Med. 2013 Nov 6
Inclusion Criteria:

 - All patients older than 18 years who are suspected of sepsis AND have an abnormal
 temperature (>38 degrees Celsius or < 36 degrees Celsius) in combination with at least one
 of the following two SIRS criteria, abnormal pulse (> 90 beats per minute) and/or abnormal
 respiratory rate (> 20 per minutes)

 Exclusion Criteria:

 -  Age <18 years

 -  Known severe allergic reaction to ceftriaxone or to other beta lactam antibiotics

 -  Known pregnancy