Abstract:Importance: Recent sepsis trials suggest that fluid-liberal vs fluid-restrictive resuscitation has similar outcomes. These trials used generalized approaches to resuscitation, and little is known about how clinicians personalize fluid and vasopressor administration in practice. Objective: To understand how clinicians personalize decisions about resuscitation in practice. Design, setting, and participants: This survey study of US clinicians in the Society of Critical Care Medicine membership roster was conducted from November 2022 to January 2023. Surveys contained 10 vignettes of patients with sepsis where pertinent clinical factors (eg, fluid received and volume status) were randomized. Respondents selected the next steps in management. Data analysis was conducted from February to September 2023. Exposure: Online Qualtrics clinical vignette survey. Main outcomes and measures: Using multivariable logistic regression, the associations of clinical factors with decisions about fluid administration, vasopressor initiation, and vasopressor route were tested. Results are presented as adjusted proportions with 95% CIs. Results: Among 11 203 invited clinicians, 550 (4.9%; 261 men [47.5%] and 192 women [34.9%]; 173 with >15 years of practice [31.5%]) completed at least 1 vignette and were included. A majority were physicians (337 respondents [61.3%]) and critical care trained (369 respondents [67.1%]). Fluid volume already received by a patient was associated with resuscitation decisions. After 1 L of fluid, an adjusted 82.5% (95% CI, 80.2%-84.8%) of respondents prescribed additional fluid and an adjusted 55.0% (95% CI, 51.9%-58.1%) initiated vasopressors. After 5 L of fluid, an adjusted 17.5% (95% CI, 15.1%-19.9%) of respondents prescribed more fluid while an adjusted 92.7% (95% CI, 91.1%-94.3%) initiated vasopressors. More respondents prescribed fluid when the patient examination found dry vs wet (ie, overloaded) volume status (adjusted proportion, 66.9% [95% CI, 62.5%-71.2%] vs adjusted proportion, 26.5% [95% CI, 22.3%-30.6%]). Medical history, respiratory status, lactate trend, and acute kidney injury had small associations with fluid and vasopressor decisions. In 1023 of 1127 vignettes (90.8%) where the patient did not have central access, respondents were willing to start vasopressors through a peripheral intravenous catheter. In cases where patients were already receiving peripheral norepinephrine, respondents were more likely to place a central line at higher norepinephrine doses of 0.5 µg/kg/min (adjusted proportion, 78.0%; 95% CI, 74.7%-81.2%) vs 0.08 µg/kg/min (adjusted proportion, 25.2%; 95% CI, 21.8%-28.5%) and after 24 hours (adjusted proportion, 59.5%; 95% CI, 56.6%-62.5%) vs 8 hours (adjusted proportion, 47.1%; 95% CI, 44.0%-50.1%). Conclusions and relevance: These findings suggest that fluid volume received is the predominant factor associated with ongoing fluid and vasopressor decisions, outweighing many other clinical factors. Peripheral vasopressor use is common. Future studies aimed at personalizing resuscitation must account for fluid volumes and should incorporate specific tools to help clinicians personalize resuscitation.

Early sepsis in Australia and New Zealand: A point‐prevalence study of haemodynamic resuscitation practices

Hemodynamic Resuscitation Characteristics of Emergency Department Patients with Sepsis and Hypotension who are and are not Admitted to ICU; a Prospective Cross-sectional Study

Early vs. Late Vassopressor therapy in the Management of Patients with Sepsis and Hypotension, A Multicenter Observational Study

Facilitators and barriers of appropriate and timely initiation of intravenous fluids in patients with sepsis in emergency departments: a consensus development Delphi study

Early fluid bolus in adults with sepsis in the emergency department: a systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative synthesis

Assessing Fluid Resuscitation in Adults with Sepsis Who Are Not Mechanically Ventilated: a Systematic Review of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies

Practice and effect evaluation of early restrictive fluid resuscitation strategy in the nursing care of patients with sepsis in the emergency department: a retrospective cohort study

The Effect of Fluid Resuscitation Timing in Early Sepsis Resuscitation

Fluid boluses and infusions in the early phase of resuscitation from septic shock and sepsis-induced hypotension: a retrospective report and outcome analysis from a tertiary hospital

An Evaluation of the Use of Aggressive Fluid Resuscitation in the Early Treatment of Sepsis Patients

Individualized Fluid Administration for Critically Ill Patients with Sepsis with an Interpretable Dynamic Treatment Regimen Model

Effect of Fluid Resuscitation on Adhesion Molecule and Hemodynamics in Patients with Severe Sepsis

An international survey of adherence to Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines 2016 regarding fluid resuscitation and vasopressors in the initial management of septic shock

Early Management of Sepsis with Emphasis on Early Goal Directed Therapy: AME Evidence Series 002

Fluids and Early Vasopressors in the Management of Septic Shock: Do We Have the Right Answers Yet?

Restrictive resuscitation in patients with sepsis and mortality: A systematic review and meta‐analysis with trial sequential analysis

Evaluation and Predictors of Fluid Resuscitation in Patients With Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock

Assessment of outcomes in patients with heart failure and end-stage kidney disease following fluid resuscitation for sepsis and septic shock

Fluid Resuscitation Dilemma in End-stage Renal Disease Patients Presenting with Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Understanding How Clinicians Personalize Fluid and Vasopressor Decisions in Early Sepsis Management

What Should We Focus on Sepsis Fluid Resuscitation? – a Research Based on Scientometrics and Visual Analysis