Download PDFPDF

Defining and measuring suspicion of sepsis: an analysis of routine data
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Improving the specificity of Suspicion of Sepsis
    • Tom Lewis, National Lead for GIRFT Programme in Pathology North Devon District Hospital

    We know that coding of sepsis is poor.

    This absence of reliable data makes it hard to compare approaches over time and between locations.

    The SoS paper basically lists a lot of codes that the authors associated with infection.

    The authors identified 267 codes indicating possible infection.

    There were 47475 cases with these codes as a primary diagnosis, with 3440 associated deaths.

    We felt that several of these reflected conditions that were not primarily infective in nature

    (or at least in which antibiotics would not be a main component of acute management)

    We removed the most common of these.

    11. N12.X - Tubulo-interstitial nephritis, not specified as acute or chronic

    13. J69.0 - Pneumonitis due to food and vomit

    54. N10.X - Acute tubulo-interstitial nephritis

    62. J84.9 - Interstitial pulmonary disease, unspecified

    73. N71.9 - Inflammatory disease of uterus, unspecified

    86. K57.1 - Diverticular disease of small intestine without perforation or abscess

    90. N48.1 - Balanoposthitis

    99. N48.2 - Other inflammatory disorders of penis

    130. J69.8 - Pneumonitis due to other solids and liquids

    The remaining 258 codes had 45521 cases with 3163 associated deaths.

    95% of cases are captured using the first 76 diagnostic codes.

    We felt that many of the cases reflected infections that...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.