The mortality rates among the control groups in the Rivers trial (46%) and the PRISM study (25.4%) are striking. Rivers cited a 49% mortality rate for sepsis at that time where today studies are reporting a mortality rate of ~30%. This meta-analysis is showing that intensive monitoring and aggressive fluids is likely not the difference. Many other studies have showed that early antibiotics (<3 hours) show a definite mortality difference. Both groups in the PRISM study received antibiotics in this time period whereas in the Rivers trial antibiotics in the control group were left to the discretion of the physician. Could this account for the difference in mortality? What else have learned over the past 15 years that could be contributing to the overall decrease in mortality among septic patients?
Easy one-click social registrationIs this safe?
We only receive the minimum information necessary to verify your account. We never get access to your friends/contacts or your profile, and we never post on your behalf. Your social account is used for logging in only.ORRegister via email
Send me updates on this Contest
In order to ensure a fair voting process and to make sure that no one votes more than once, we ask that you register either with a social networking account (easiest, only requires one click) or by registering with your email address (this will require you to click on a verification email that we will send you).
You only need to register once.