Internal Medicine · General Practice · 2 h ago
Expert Panel Identifies Priorities for Recovery After Sepsis
A 15-member multidisciplinary expert panel used a modified Delphi method to assess 18 care practices for people recovering from sepsis. Ten practices were rated valid; five were judged both highly important and moderately resource-intensive, including arranging follow-up before discharge and counseling patients about symptoms and medications.
- Panel assessed 18 practices using a modified Delphi method.
- Ten practices were rated valid; eight had uncertain validity.
- Five valid practices were highly important with moderate resource needs.
- Panel composition may have influenced ratings.
Sepsis survivors can experience new health problems, readmission and post-acute mortality, but evidence on how best to support recovery is limited. Researchers convened 15 experts in sepsis, critical care, hospital and primary care, geriatrics, nursing and quality improvement, alongside Veteran patient representatives. Using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method, the panel rated 18 care practices for validity, importance and resource intensity.
Ten of the 18 practices (56%) were rated valid, while eight (44%) had uncertain validity. Among the valid practices, five were rated highly important and moderately resource-intensive: scheduling recommended follow-up before discharge; assessing basic and instrumental activities of daily living and durable medical equipment needs; educating patients about signs and symptoms of sepsis and common post-sepsis symptoms; and counseling patients or caregivers about discharge medications and their indications.
These are expert-panel ratings, not evidence that the practices improve patient outcomes. The authors suggest the findings can inform quality improvement and resource allocation. Ratings may be affected by panel composition: most members were Veterans Health Administration clinicians, and no social workers participated.
In practice
For adults recovering from sepsis, the panel prioritized several discharge and recovery-support practices: arrange recommended follow-up before discharge; assess daily-function limitations and equipment needs; explain sepsis warning signs and common post-sepsis symptoms; and review discharge medications with patients or caregivers. These are expert-consensus priorities intended to inform care planning and quality improvement, not interventions shown here to improve outcomes. Eight of 18 practices had uncertain validity, and the panel’s composition—mostly VHA clinicians, without social work representation—may limit how broadly the ratings apply.
AI-generated clinical interpretation · Not editor-reviewed
Is this summary clinically accurate?
Help fellow clinicians: your rating sends inaccurate summaries straight to our editors.
Sign in to rate this summary →Source
Journal of General Internal Medicine: Best Practices for Optimizing Recovery from Sepsis; Results of an Expert Panel ↗This is an automated AI-condensed summary that has not yet been reviewed by an editor. Always consult the full item at the original source.