Interdisciplinary perspectives on computed tomography in sepsis: survey among medical doctors at a large university medical center
Maria Isabel Opper Hernando,Denis Witham,Peter Richard Steinhagen,Stefan Angermair,Wolfgang Bauer,Friederike Compton,Andreas Edel,Jan Kruse,York Kühnle,Gunnar Lachmann,Susanne Marz,Holger Müller-Redetzky,Jens Nee,Oliver Paul,Damaris Praeger,Carsten Skurk,Miriam Stegemann,Alexander Uhrig,Stefan Wolf,Elke Zimmermann,Kerstin Rubarth,Myrto Bolanaki,Joachim Seybold,Marc Dewey,Julian Pohlan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-09842-3
Abstract:Objectives: This study aims to describe physicians' perspectives on the use of computed tomography (CT) in patients with sepsis. Methods: In January 2022, physicians of a large European university medical center were surveyed using a web-based questionnaire asking about their views on the role of CT in sepsis. A total of 371 questionnaires met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed using work experience, workplace, and medical specialty of physicians as variables. Chi-square tests were performed. Results: Physicians considered the ability to detect an unknown focus as the greatest benefit of CT scans in sepsis (70.9%, n = 263/371). Two clinical criteria - "signs of decreased vigilance" (89.2%, n = 331/371) and "increased catecholamine demand" (84.7%, n = 314/371) - were considered highly relevant for a CT request. Elevated procalcitonin (82.7%, n = 307/371) and lactate levels (83.6%, n = 310/371) were consistently found to be critical laboratory values to request a CT. As long as there is evidence of infection in one organ region, most physicians (42.6%, n = 158/371) would order a CT scan based on clinical assessment. Combined examination of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis was favored (34.8%, n = 129/371) in cases without clinical clues of an infection source. A time window of ≥ 1-6 h was preferred for both CT examinations (53.9%, n = 200/371) and CT-guided interventions (59.3%, n = 220/371) in patients with sepsis. Conclusion: Despite much consensus, there are significant differences in attitudes towards the use of CT in septic patients among physicians from different workplaces and medical specialties. Knowledge of these perspectives may improve patient management and interprofessional communication. Key points: Despite interdisciplinary consensus on the use of CT in sepsis, statistically significant differences in the responses are apparent among physicians from different workplaces and medical specialties. The detection of a previously unknown source of infection and the ability to plan interventions and/or surgery based on CT findings are considered key advantages of CT in septic patients. Timing of CT reflects the requirements of specific disciplines.