Sepsis Awareness 2012 final · Background& •...

Sepsis Awareness 2012 Prepared by Jill Gress Harris Interac4ve July 2012

Table of Content

Background Page 3 Objec4ve Page 4 Methodology and Sample Design Page 5 Execu4ve Summary Page 6 Detailed Findings Page 10

© Harris Interactive 2

Background

•  Sepsis is the 3rd leading killer in the US. 1

•  There an es4mated 215,000 deaths per year in the US due to Sepsis. 1

•  Sepsis has been defined by the Society of Cri4cal Care Medicine and American College of Chest Physicians Consensus conference as a systemic inflammatory response syndrome caused by infec?on. 2

•  A study among US community hospitals showed the rate of severe Sepsis hospitaliza4on almost doubled during an 11-‐year period studied and is considerably greater than has been previously predicted. Mortality from severe Sepsis also increased significantly over 10 year period.3


1 Angus, DC; Linde-Zwirble, WT; Lidicker, J; Clermont, G; Carcillo, J.; Pinsky, MR “Epidemiology of severe Sepsis in the United States; analysis of incidence, outcome and associated costs of care.” Critical Care Medicine 2001 Jul; 29 (7): 1472- 4.

2 Bone, RC; Balk, RA; Cerra, FB; et al. “Definition for Sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in Sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee.” American College Chest Phys/Soc Critical Care Medi Chest 1992; 101: 1644 – 1655.

3 Dombrovskiy, VY; Martin, AA; Sunderram, J; Paz, HL. “Rapid increase in hospitalization and mortality rates for severe Sepsis in the United States: a trend analysis from 1993 to 2003.” Crit Care Med. 2007 May;35(5):1414-5.

Objec?ves

•  Key objec?ves of this study were to:

•  Compare findings from 2003 and 2010, 2011 for the US market only

•  Determine the current awareness of Sepsis in the United States;

•  Explore how the Americans in this study define Sepsis.

•  For 2012, we are switching the research methodology from telephone to online but are using this as a transi4on year.

•  Results from this study are intended for public release.


Methodology and Sample Design for Telephone

•  This survey was conducted as part of the Harris Interac4ve omnibus telephone survey.

•  The sample is representa4ve (weighted) of the U.S. adult popula4on living in households with telephones in the con4nental United States.

•  The survey was conducted using random digit dialing (RDD) – a technique ensuring geographic representa4veness of the sample and inclusion of households with listed and unlisted telephone numbers.

•  Sample consists of 1,008 adults (502 men and 506 women) 18 years of age and older.

•  Interviewing occurred June 14-‐17, 2012.


Methodology and Sample Design for Online

•  This survey was conducted as part of the Harris Interac4ve omnibus online survey.

•  The sample is representa4ve (weighted) of the U.S. adult popula4on living in in the con4nental United States.

•  The survey was conducted using HPOL, Harris Interac4ve panel of respondents recruited through mul4ple sources.

•  Sample consists of 2,203 adults (1,014 men and 1,189 women) 18 years of age and older.

•  Interviewing occurred June 13-‐15, 2012.


Execu?ve Summary

7 © Harris Interactive

Execu?ve Summary (Online Methodology)

Only four in ten Americans have heard of the term Sepsis. •  With 14% are not sure if they had heard of the term.

–  Women are more likely than men to report having heard the term Sepsis (44% v. 35%).

–  Those age 35+ are more likely to report having heard the term Sepsis than those under 35 (46% vs. 25%)


Execu?ve Summary

Of those who have heard of the term Sepsis, many are not sure of how to define this term correctly.

•  34% of respondents who have heard of the term are unable to define Sepsis.

–  51% of those that have heard of Sepsis define it as an “infec4on.” –  The youngest Americans are less likely to define as an “infec4on” (32% of

those ages under 35 v. 52% of 35 year olds and over). –  More women define Sepsis as “infec4on” than men (58% of women

compared to 42% of men).


Overview

1.  One thing we always see in a transi4on from phone to online is a higher number of those who are willing to admit they do not know something.

2.  In the research on research we have done, we have found that two things contribute to this – first, in an online survey, the “not sure” op4on is presented. But, second, the presence of a live interviewer always has an adverse effect on the respondent to not want to admit they do not know something – even when a not sure response is presented in a telephone environment.

3.  Since the level of awareness is not different for either methodology, this shows that the 2 in 5 who say they have heard of it is a true measurement.

4.  These findings con4nue to indicate a need for greater understanding of Sepsis. As well as sugges4on that there is s4ll an opportunity to build awareness.


Detailed Findings

11 © Harris Interactive

Nearly 60% of US adults who responded have not heard of the term Sepsis.


2012 Online Data QS1: Have you ever heard of the term Sepsis?

Comparison of Telephone vs. Online Sepsis Awareness


The awareness level for the term Sepsis is similar from previous years.*


*Cannot trend the data from one methodology to another,/

Women are significantly more likely to have heard the term Sepsis than men.

2012 Online Data Men (n = 1,014) Women (n = 1,189)

Yes No Not Sure

35% 50%* 14%

44%* 41% 14%


* Indicates significant difference between men and women. QS1 Have you ever heard of the term Sepsis?

The younger Americans are significantly less likely to have heard of the term Sepsis.


2012 Online Data QS1 Have you ever heard of the term Sepsis?

Of those respondents who have heard of sepsis, they describe the condi?ons in many different ways

Descrip?ons Infec?on (unspecified) (n=319) *

Don’t Know (n = 244)*

Systemic/Overwhelming/ Affec?ng the whole body (n=168)*

Blood Infec?on (n=139)*

Serious/severe/dangerous (n=126)*

Germs/Bacteria Deadly/lethal Organs affected

Bacterial Infec4on

A medical term

Blood poisoning

Toxic/poisonous Ajtudes toward sex/gender

Unclean/unsanitary/polluted

Form of life

Germs/Bacteria Can result from hospital stay

Blood Disease Eats away at the body/rojng/necro4c 4ssue/skin

Health condi4on/problem

A leakage/leaking with the body

Internal Blood related Results from/causes open sores/wounds

Bacteria in blood

Staph infec4on

Inflamma4on

Infec4ous Other


* Denotes most common stated definition.

2012 Data Base: Those that have heard the term sepsis. QS2 In your own words, how would you describe sepsis?

Sepsis Descrip?on


*includes any descrip?on with the word infec?on in it. ** 2012 is online methodology and cannot be trended compared to other years

When asked to define Sepsis, men and women are in agreement that infec?on is related to the defini?on.

2012 Data Men (n=548) Women (n=745)

Infec4on (unspecified) 24% 29%

Blood infec4on 9% 14%

Germ/Bacteria 5% 9%

Bacterial Infec4on 4% 6%

Don’t Know 26% 16%


Base: Those that have heard the term Sepsis. QS2 In your own words, how would you describe Sepsis?

Sepsis Descrip?on* for Gender


*Using the term “infec?on” – Online methodology

Middle and Older American who responded are more likely to define Sepsis as an “infec?on”. 2012 Data < 35 35-‐44 45+

Infec4on (unspecified) 13% 24% 32%

Blood Infec4on 3% 15% 14%

Germ/Bacteria 12% 5% 5%

Bacterial Infec4on 2% 2% 5%

Don’t Know 24% 23% 19%


Base: Those who have heard the term Sepsis QS2 In your own words, how would you describe Sepsis?

Sepsis Awareness 2012 final · Background& •...

Documents

Transcript of Sepsis Awareness 2012 final · Background& •...