-
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Aug 2016To systematically review studies quantifying the associations of long term (clinic), mid-term (home), and short term (ambulatory) variability in blood pressure,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review studies quantifying the associations of long term (clinic), mid-term (home), and short term (ambulatory) variability in blood pressure, independent of mean blood pressure, with cardiovascular disease events and mortality.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and Web of Science, searched to 15 February 2016 for full text articles in English.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION
Prospective cohort studies or clinical trials in adults, except those in patients receiving haemodialysis, where the condition may directly impact blood pressure variability. Standardised hazard ratios were extracted and, if there was little risk of confounding, combined using random effects meta-analysis in main analyses. Outcomes included all cause and cardiovascular disease mortality and cardiovascular disease events. Measures of variability included standard deviation, coefficient of variation, variation independent of mean, and average real variability, but not night dipping or day-night variation.
RESULTS
41 papers representing 19 observational cohort studies and 17 clinical trial cohorts, comprising 46 separate analyses were identified. Long term variability in blood pressure was studied in 24 papers, mid-term in four, and short-term in 15 (two studied both long term and short term variability). Results from 23 analyses were excluded from main analyses owing to high risks of confounding. Increased long term variability in systolic blood pressure was associated with risk of all cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.22), cardiovascular disease mortality (1.18, 1.09 to 1.28), cardiovascular disease events (1.18, 1.07 to 1.30), coronary heart disease (1.10, 1.04 to 1.16), and stroke (1.15, 1.04 to 1.27). Increased mid-term and short term variability in daytime systolic blood pressure were also associated with all cause mortality (1.15, 1.06 to 1.26 and 1.10, 1.04 to 1.16, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
Long term variability in blood pressure is associated with cardiovascular and mortality outcomes, over and above the effect of mean blood pressure. Associations are similar in magnitude to those of cholesterol measures with cardiovascular disease. Limited data for mid-term and short term variability showed similar associations. Future work should focus on the clinical implications of assessment of variability in blood pressure and avoid the common confounding pitfalls observed to date.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42014015695.
Topics: Blood Pressure; Blood Pressure Determination; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cause of Death; Humans
PubMed: 27511067
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i4098 -
Medicine and Science in Sports and... Jun 2019This article reviews and updates the evidence on the associations between physical activity and risk for cancer, and for mortality in persons with cancer, as presented...
PURPOSE
This article reviews and updates the evidence on the associations between physical activity and risk for cancer, and for mortality in persons with cancer, as presented in the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Scientific Report.
METHODS
Systematic reviews of meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and pooled analyses were conducted through December 2016. An updated systematic review of such reports plus original research through February 2018 was conducted. This article also identifies future research needs.
RESULTS
In reviewing 45 reports comprising hundreds of epidemiologic studies with several million study participants, the report found strong evidence for an association between highest versus lowest physical activity levels and reduced risks of bladder, breast, colon, endometrial, esophageal adenocarcinoma, renal, and gastric cancers. Relative risk reductions ranged from approximately 10% to 20%. Based on 18 systematic reviews and meta-analyses, the report also found moderate or limited associations between greater amounts of physical activity and decreased all-cause and cancer-specific mortality in individuals with a diagnosis of breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer, with relative risk reductions ranging almost up to 40% to 50%. The updated search, with five meta-analyses and 25 source articles reviewed, confirmed these findings.
CONCLUSIONS
Levels of physical activity recommended in the 2018 Guidelines are associated with reduced risk and improved survival for several cancers. More research is needed to determine the associations between physical activity and incidence for less common cancers and associations with survival for other cancers. Future studies of cancer incidence and mortality should consider these associations for population subgroups, to determine dose-response relationships between physical activity and cancer risk and prognosis, and to establish mechanisms to explain these associations.
Topics: Biomedical Research; Exercise; Healthy Lifestyle; Humans; Incidence; Neoplasms; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Primary Prevention; Risk Reduction Behavior; Survival Rate
PubMed: 31095082
DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001937 -
International Journal of Epidemiology Jun 2017Questions remain about the strength and shape of the dose-response relationship between fruit and vegetable intake and risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Fruit and vegetable intake and the risk of cardiovascular disease, total cancer and all-cause mortality-a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies.
BACKGROUND
Questions remain about the strength and shape of the dose-response relationship between fruit and vegetable intake and risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer and mortality, and the effects of specific types of fruit and vegetables. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify these associations.
METHODS
PubMed and Embase were searched up to 29 September 2016. Prospective studies of fruit and vegetable intake and cardiovascular disease, total cancer and all-cause mortality were included. Summary relative risks (RRs) were calculated using a random effects model, and the mortality burden globally was estimated; 95 studies (142 publications) were included.
RESULTS
For fruits and vegetables combined, the summary RR per 200 g/day was 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.90-0.94, I 2 = 0%, n = 15] for coronary heart disease, 0.84 (95% CI: 0.76-0.92, I 2 = 73%, n = 10) for stroke, 0.92 (95% CI: 0.90-0.95, I 2 = 31%, n = 13) for cardiovascular disease, 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95-0.99, I 2 = 49%, n = 12) for total cancer and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.87-0.93, I 2 = 83%, n = 15) for all-cause mortality. Similar associations were observed for fruits and vegetables separately. Reductions in risk were observed up to 800 g/day for all outcomes except cancer (600 g/day). Inverse associations were observed between the intake of apples and pears, citrus fruits, green leafy vegetables, cruciferous vegetables, and salads and cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality, and between the intake of green-yellow vegetables and cruciferous vegetables and total cancer risk. An estimated 5.6 and 7.8 million premature deaths worldwide in 2013 may be attributable to a fruit and vegetable intake below 500 and 800 g/day, respectively, if the observed associations are causal.
CONCLUSIONS
Fruit and vegetable intakes were associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer and all-cause mortality. These results support public health recommendations to increase fruit and vegetable intake for the prevention of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and premature mortality.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Diet; Fruit; Humans; Mortality; Neoplasms; Prospective Studies; Risk Reduction Behavior; Vegetables
PubMed: 28338764
DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyw319 -
JAMA Psychiatry Apr 2015Despite the potential importance of understanding excess mortality among people with mental disorders, no comprehensive meta-analyses have been conducted quantifying... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
IMPORTANCE
Despite the potential importance of understanding excess mortality among people with mental disorders, no comprehensive meta-analyses have been conducted quantifying mortality across mental disorders.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of mortality among people with mental disorders and examine differences in mortality risks by type of death, diagnosis, and study characteristics.
DATA SOURCES
We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, and Web of Science from inception through May 7, 2014, including references of eligible articles. Our search strategy included terms for mental disorders (eg, mental disorders, serious mental illness, and severe mental illness), specific diagnoses (eg, schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, and bipolar disorder), and mortality. We also used Google Scholar to identify articles that cited eligible articles.
STUDY SELECTION
English-language cohort studies that reported a mortality estimate of mental disorders compared with a general population or controls from the same study setting without mental illness were included. Two reviewers independently reviewed the titles, abstracts, and articles. Of 2481 studies identified, 203 articles met the eligibility criteria and represented 29 countries in 6 continents.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
One reviewer conducted a full abstraction of all data, and 2 reviewers verified accuracy.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Mortality estimates (eg, standardized mortality ratios, relative risks, hazard ratios, odds ratios, and years of potential life lost) comparing people with mental disorders and the general population or people without mental disorders. We used random-effects meta-analysis models to pool mortality ratios for all, natural, and unnatural causes of death. We also examined years of potential life lost and estimated the population attributable risk of mortality due to mental disorders.
RESULTS
For all-cause mortality, the pooled relative risk of mortality among those with mental disorders (from 148 studies) was 2.22 (95% CI, 2.12-2.33). Of these, 135 studies revealed that mortality was significantly higher among people with mental disorders than among the comparison population. A total of 67.3% of deaths among people with mental disorders were due to natural causes, 17.5% to unnatural causes, and the remainder to other or unknown causes. The median years of potential life lost was 10 years (n = 24 studies). We estimate that 14.3% of deaths worldwide, or approximately 8 million deaths each year, are attributable to mental disorders.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
These estimates suggest that mental disorders rank among the most substantial causes of death worldwide. Efforts to quantify and address the global burden of illness need to better consider the role of mental disorders in preventable mortality.
Topics: Cause of Death; Cohort Studies; Cost of Illness; Humans; Internationality; Life Expectancy; Mental Disorders; Risk Factors
PubMed: 25671328
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2014.2502 -
BMJ Open Jun 2016It is well known that total cholesterol becomes less of a risk factor or not at all for all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality with increasing age, but as little is... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
It is well known that total cholesterol becomes less of a risk factor or not at all for all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality with increasing age, but as little is known as to whether low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), one component of total cholesterol, is associated with mortality in the elderly, we decided to investigate this issue.
SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND OUTCOME MEASURES
We sought PubMed for cohort studies, where LDL-C had been investigated as a risk factor for all-cause and/or CV mortality in individuals ≥60 years from the general population.
RESULTS
We identified 19 cohort studies including 30 cohorts with a total of 68 094 elderly people, where all-cause mortality was recorded in 28 cohorts and CV mortality in 9 cohorts. Inverse association between all-cause mortality and LDL-C was seen in 16 cohorts (in 14 with statistical significance) representing 92% of the number of participants, where this association was recorded. In the rest, no association was found. In two cohorts, CV mortality was highest in the lowest LDL-C quartile and with statistical significance; in seven cohorts, no association was found.
CONCLUSIONS
High LDL-C is inversely associated with mortality in most people over 60 years. This finding is inconsistent with the cholesterol hypothesis (ie, that cholesterol, particularly LDL-C, is inherently atherogenic). Since elderly people with high LDL-C live as long or longer than those with low LDL-C, our analysis provides reason to question the validity of the cholesterol hypothesis. Moreover, our study provides the rationale for a re-evaluation of guidelines recommending pharmacological reduction of LDL-C in the elderly as a component of cardiovascular disease prevention strategies.
Topics: Aged; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cholesterol, LDL; Humans; Middle Aged; Mortality; Risk Factors
PubMed: 27292972
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010401 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2020Diabetes mellitus, a metabolic disorder characterised by hyperglycaemia and associated with a heavy burden of microvascular and macrovascular complications, frequently...
BACKGROUND
Diabetes mellitus, a metabolic disorder characterised by hyperglycaemia and associated with a heavy burden of microvascular and macrovascular complications, frequently remains undiagnosed. Screening of apparently healthy individuals may lead to early detection and treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus and may prevent or delay the development of related complications.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, LILACS, the WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception. The date of the last search was May 2019 for all databases. We applied no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials involving adults and children without known diabetes mellitus, conducted over at least three months, that assessed the effect of diabetes screening (mass, targeted, or opportunistic) compared to no diabetes screening.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts for potential relevance and reviewed the full-texts of potentially relevant studies, extracted data, and carried out 'Risk of bias' assessment using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We screened 4651 titles and abstracts identified by the search and assessed 92 full-texts/records for inclusion. We included one cluster-randomised trial, the ADDITION-Cambridge study, which involved 20,184 participants from 33 general practices in Eastern England and assessed the effects of inviting versus not inviting high-risk individuals to screening for diabetes. The diabetes risk score was used to identify high-risk individuals; it comprised variables relating to age, sex, body mass index, and the use of prescribed steroid and anti-hypertensive medication. Twenty-seven practices were randomised to the screening group (11,737 participants actually attending screening) and 5 practices to the no-screening group (4137 participants). In both groups, 36% of participants were women; the average age of participants was 58.2 years in the screening group and 57.9 years in the no-screening group. Almost half of participants in both groups were on antihypertensive medication. The findings from the first phase of this study indicate that screening compared to no screening for type 2 diabetes did not show a clear difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.25, low-certainty evidence). Screening compared to no screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus showed an HR of 1.26, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.12 (low-certainty evidence) for diabetes-related mortality (based on whether diabetes was reported as a cause of death on the death certificate). Diabetes-related morbidity and health-related quality of life were only reported in a subsample and did not show a substantial difference between the screening intervention and control. The included study did not report on adverse events, incidence of type 2 diabetes, glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and socioeconomic effects.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We are uncertain about the effects of screening for type 2 diabetes on all-cause mortality and diabetes-related mortality. Evidence was available from one study only. We are therefore unable to draw any firm conclusions relating to the health outcomes of early type 2 diabetes mellitus screening. Furthermore, the included study did not assess all of the outcomes prespecified in the review (diabetes-related morbidity, incidence of type 2 diabetes, health-related quality of life, adverse events, socioeconomic effects).
Topics: Cause of Death; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged
PubMed: 32470201
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005266.pub2 -
International Journal of Infectious... Mar 2020To provide better management of Fournier's gangrene, mortality-associated comorbidities and common etiologies were identified. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
To provide better management of Fournier's gangrene, mortality-associated comorbidities and common etiologies were identified.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted using 12 databases, followed by meticulous screening to select relevant articles. Meta-analysis and meta-regression (for possible cofounders) were both done for all possible outcomes.
RESULTS
Out of 1186 reports screened, 38 studies were finally included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. A higher risk of mortality was detected in patients with diabetes, heart disease, renal failure, and kidney disease, with risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of 0.72 (0.59-0.89), 0.39 (0.24-0.62), 0.41 (0.27-0.63), and 0.34 (95% CI 0.16-0.73), respectively. However, there was no association between mortality rates and comorbid hypertension, lung disease, liver disease, or malignant disease (p > 0.05). The highest mortality rates were due to sepsis (76%) and multiple organ failure (66%), followed by respiratory (19.4%), renal (18%), cardiovascular (15.7%), and hepatic (5%) mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
Modifications to the Fournier's Gangrene Severity Index (FGSI) are recommended, in order to include comorbidities as an important prognostic tool for FG mortality. Close monitoring of the patients, with special interest given to the main causes of mortality, is an essential element of the management process.
Topics: Cause of Death; Comorbidity; Fournier Gangrene; Humans; Prognosis; Retrospective Studies; Sepsis; Severity of Illness Index; Survival Rate
PubMed: 31962181
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2019.12.030 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Aug 2019To examine the dose-response associations between accelerometer assessed total physical activity, different intensities of physical activity, and sedentary time and all... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To examine the dose-response associations between accelerometer assessed total physical activity, different intensities of physical activity, and sedentary time and all cause mortality.
DESIGN
Systematic review and harmonised meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, Web of Science, Sport Discus from inception to 31 July 2018.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Prospective cohort studies assessing physical activity and sedentary time by accelerometry and associations with all cause mortality and reported effect estimates as hazard ratios, odds ratios, or relative risks with 95% confidence intervals.
DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS
Guidelines for meta-analyses and systematic reviews for observational studies and PRISMA guidelines were followed. Two authors independently screened the titles and abstracts. One author performed a full text review and another extracted the data. Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias. Individual level participant data were harmonised and analysed at study level. Data on physical activity were categorised by quarters at study level, and study specific associations with all cause mortality were analysed using Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. Study specific results were summarised using random effects meta-analysis.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE
All cause mortality.
RESULTS
39 studies were retrieved for full text review; 10 were eligible for inclusion, three were excluded owing to harmonisation challenges (eg, wrist placement of the accelerometer), and one study did not participate. Two additional studies with unpublished mortality data were also included. Thus, individual level data from eight studies (n=36 383; mean age 62.6 years; 72.8% women), with median follow-up of 5.8 years (range 3.0-14.5 years) and 2149 (5.9%) deaths were analysed. Any physical activity, regardless of intensity, was associated with lower risk of mortality, with a non-linear dose-response. Hazards ratios for mortality were 1.00 (referent) in the first quarter (least active), 0.48 (95% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.54) in the second quarter, 0.34 (0.26 to 0.45) in the third quarter, and 0.27 (0.23 to 0.32) in the fourth quarter (most active). Corresponding hazards ratios for light physical activity were 1.00, 0.60 (0.54 to 0.68), 0.44 (0.38 to 0.51), and 0.38 (0.28 to 0.51), and for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity were 1.00, 0.64 (0.55 to 0.74), 0.55 (0.40 to 0.74), and 0.52 (0.43 to 0.61). For sedentary time, hazards ratios were 1.00 (referent; least sedentary), 1.28 (1.09 to 1.51), 1.71 (1.36 to 2.15), and 2.63 (1.94 to 3.56).
CONCLUSION
Higher levels of total physical activity, at any intensity, and less time spent sedentary, are associated with substantially reduced risk for premature mortality, with evidence of a non-linear dose-response pattern in middle aged and older adults.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42018091808.
Topics: Accelerometry; Aged; Exercise; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Mortality; Proportional Hazards Models; Prospective Studies; Risk Factors; Sedentary Behavior
PubMed: 31434697
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.l4570 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Jun 2016To quantify the dose-response relation between consumption of whole grain and specific types of grains and the risk of cardiovascular disease, total cancer, and all... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Whole grain consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and all cause and cause specific mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies.
OBJECTIVE
To quantify the dose-response relation between consumption of whole grain and specific types of grains and the risk of cardiovascular disease, total cancer, and all cause and cause specific mortality.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and Embase searched up to 3 April 2016.
STUDY SELECTION
Prospective studies reporting adjusted relative risk estimates for the association between intake of whole grains or specific types of grains and cardiovascular disease, total cancer, all cause or cause specific mortality.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Summary relative risks and 95% confidence intervals calculated with a random effects model.
RESULTS
45 studies (64 publications) were included. The summary relative risks per 90 g/day increase in whole grain intake (90 g is equivalent to three servings-for example, two slices of bread and one bowl of cereal or one and a half pieces of pita bread made from whole grains) was 0.81 (95% confidence interval 0.75 to 0.87; I(2)=9%, n=7 studies) for coronary heart disease, 0.88 (0.75 to 1.03; I(2)=56%, n=6) for stroke, and 0.78 (0.73 to 0.85; I(2)=40%, n=10) for cardiovascular disease, with similar results when studies were stratified by whether the outcome was incidence or mortality. The relative risks for morality were 0.85 (0.80 to 0.91; I(2)=37%, n=6) for total cancer, 0.83 (0.77 to 0.90; I(2)=83%, n=11) for all causes, 0.78 (0.70 to 0.87; I(2)=0%, n=4) for respiratory disease, 0.49 (0.23 to 1.05; I(2)=85%, n=4) for diabetes, 0.74 (0.56 to 0.96; I(2)=0%, n=3) for infectious diseases, 1.15 (0.66 to 2.02; I(2)=79%, n=2) for diseases of the nervous system disease, and 0.78 (0.75 to 0.82; I(2)=0%, n=5) for all non-cardiovascular, non-cancer causes. Reductions in risk were observed up to an intake of 210-225 g/day (seven to seven and a half servings per day) for most of the outcomes. Intakes of specific types of whole grains including whole grain bread, whole grain breakfast cereals, and added bran, as well as total bread and total breakfast cereals were also associated with reduced risks of cardiovascular disease and/or all cause mortality, but there was little evidence of an association with refined grains, white rice, total rice, or total grains.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis provides further evidence that whole grain intake is associated with a reduced risk of coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease, and total cancer, and mortality from all causes, respiratory diseases, infectious diseases, diabetes, and all non-cardiovascular, non-cancer causes. These findings support dietary guidelines that recommend increased intake of whole grain to reduce the risk of chronic diseases and premature mortality.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Cause of Death; Diet; Humans; Neoplasms; Prospective Studies; Risk Factors; Whole Grains
PubMed: 27301975
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i2716 -
Critical Care (London, England) May 2020Sepsis and septic shock remain drivers for mortality in critically ill patients. The heterogeneity of the syndrome hinders the generation of reproducible numbers on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Sepsis and septic shock remain drivers for mortality in critically ill patients. The heterogeneity of the syndrome hinders the generation of reproducible numbers on mortality risks. Consequently, mortality rates range from 15 to 56%. We aimed to update and extend the existing knowledge from meta-analyses and estimate 30- and 90-day mortality rates for sepsis and septic shock separately, stratify rates by region and study type and assess mortality rates across different sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of articles published in PubMed or in the Cochrane Database, between 2009 and 2019 in English language including interventional and observational studies. A meta-analysis of pooled 28/30- and 90-day mortality rated separately for sepsis and septic shock was done using a random-effects model. Time trends were assessed via Joinpoint methodology and for the assessment of mortality rate over different SOFA scores, and linear regression was applied.
RESULTS
Four thousand five hundred records were identified. After title/abstract screening, 783 articles were assessed in full text for eligibility. Of those, 170 studies were included. Average 30-day septic shock mortality was 34.7% (95% CI 32.6-36.9%), and 90-day septic shock mortality was 38.5% (95% CI 35.4-41.5%). Average 30-day sepsis mortality was 24.4% (95% CI 21.5-27.2%), and 90-day sepsis mortality was 32.2% (95% CI 27.0-37.5%). Estimated mortality rates from RCTs were below prospective and retrospective cohort studies. Rates varied between regions, with 30-day septic shock mortality being 33.7% (95% CI 31.5-35.9) in North America, 32.5% (95% CI 31.7-33.3) in Europe and 26.4% (95% CI 18.1-34.6) in Australia. A statistically significant decrease of 30-day septic shock mortality rate was found between 2009 and 2011, but not after 2011. Per 1-point increase of the average SOFA score, average mortality increased by 1.8-3.3%.
CONCLUSION
Trends of lower sepsis and continuous septic shock mortality rates over time and regional disparities indicate a remaining unmet need for improving sepsis management. Further research is needed to investigate how trends in the burden of disease influence mortality rates in sepsis and septic shock at 30- and 90-day mortality over time.
Topics: Australia; Europe; Humans; Mortality; North America; Sepsis; Shock, Septic
PubMed: 32430052
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-020-02950-2