articleNew England Journal of MedicineMar 18, 2014BRONZE OA

A Randomized Trial of Protocol-Based Care for Early Septic Shock

TPThe ProCESS Investigators

University of Pittsburgh Medical Center

PubMed
Indexed incrossrefpubmed

Abstract

Background

In a single-center study published more than a decade ago involving patients presenting to the emergency department with severe sepsis and septic shock, mortality was markedly lower among those who were treated according to a 6-hour protocol of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT), in which intravenous fluids, vasopressors, inotropes, and blood transfusions were adjusted to reach central hemodynamic targets, than among those receiving usual care. We conducted a trial to determine whether these findings were generalizable and whether all aspects of the protocol were necessary.

Methods

In 31 emergency departments in the United States, we randomly assigned patients with septic shock to one of three groups for 6 hours of resuscitation: protocol-based EGDT; protocol-based standard therapy that did not require the placement of a central venous catheter, administration of inotropes, or blood transfusions; or usual care. The primary end point was 60-day in-hospital mortality. We tested sequentially whether protocol-based care (EGDT and standard-therapy groups combined) was superior to usual care and whether protocol-based EGDT was superior to protocol-based standard therapy. Secondary outcomes included longer-term mortality and the need for organ support.

Citation impact

2,393
total citations
FWCI
238.52
Percentile
100%
References
25
Citations per year

Authors

1
  • TP
    The ProCESS InvestigatorsCorresponding

    University of Pittsburgh Medical Center

Topics & keywords

Keywords
  • Medicine
  • Early goal-directed therapy
  • Septic shock
  • Resuscitation
  • Protocol (science)
  • Surviving Sepsis Campaign
  • Sepsis
  • Randomized controlled trial
UN Sustainable Development Goals
  • Good health and well-being
No related works found for this paper.