Home › Research › Digital health tools
Predictors of long-term mortality after severe sepsis in the elderly
Lemay AC, Anzueto A, Restrepo MI, Mortensen EM.. The American journal of the medical sciences, 2014-04-01
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Background Mortality rates after severe sepsis are extremely high, and the main focus of most research is short-term mortality, which may not be associated with long-term outcomes. The purpose of this study was to examine long-term mortality after a severe sepsis and identify factors associated with this mortality. Methods The authors performed a population-based study using Veterans' Affairs administrative data of patients aged 65 years and older. The outcome of interest was mortality > 90 days following hospitalization. Our primary analyses were Cox proportional hazard models to examine specific risk factors for long-term mortality. Results There were 2,727 patients that met the inclusion criteria. Overall mortality was 55%, and 1- and 2-year mortality rates were 31% and 43%, respectively. Factors significantly associated with long-term mortality included congestive heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, dementia, diabetes with complications and use of mechanical ventilation. Smoking cessation and cardiac medications were associated with decreased long-term mortality rates. Conclusions The authors identified several factors, including receipt of mechanical ventilation, which were significantly associated with increased long-term mortality for survivors of severe sepsis. This information will help clinicians discuss prognosis with patients and their families.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Lemay, A. C., Anzueto, A., Restrepo, M. I., & Mortensen, E. M. (2014). Predictors of long-term mortality after severe sepsis in the elderly. The American journal of the medical sciences. https://doi.org/10.1097/maj.0b013e318295a147
Vancouver
Lemay AC, Anzueto A, Restrepo MI, Mortensen EM. Predictors of long-term mortality after severe sepsis in the elderly. The American journal of the medical sciences. 2014. doi:10.1097/maj.0b013e318295a147. PMID: 23689053.
BibTeX
@article{lemay2014-23689053,
author = {Lemay, A. C. and Anzueto, A. and Restrepo, M. I. and Mortensen, E. M.},
title = {{Predictors of long-term mortality after severe sepsis in the elderly}},
journal = {The American journal of the medical sciences},
year = {2014},
doi = {10.1097/maj.0b013e318295a147},
pmid = {23689053},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1097/maj.0b013e318295a147}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Background Mortality rates after severe sepsis are extremely high, and the main focus of most research is short-term mortality, which may not be associated with long-term outcomes.
- The purpose of this study was to examine long-term mortality after a severe sepsis and identify factors associated with this mortality.
- Results There were 2,727 patients that met the inclusion criteria.
- Overall mortality was 55%, and 1- and 2-year mortality rates were 31% and 43%, respectively.
- Factors significantly associated with long-term mortality included congestive heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, dementia, diabetes with complications and use of mechanical ventilation.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →
Study details
- Participants2,727
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 47/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The American journal of the medical sciences) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2014 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 3 / 4 | 2,727 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 23689053) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 27 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100. |
| Total | 47 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Digital health tools
Also tagged “deaths”
109 studies in the library carry the topic tag “deaths”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 109 tagged studies.