OBJECTIVES: 

Sepsis awareness and understanding are important aspects of prevention, recognition, and clinical management of sepsis. We conducted a scoping review to identify and map the literature related to sepsis awareness, general knowledge, and information-seeking behaviors with a goal to inform future sepsis research and knowledge translation campaigns.

DESIGN: 

Scoping review.

SETTING: 

Using Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework, we conducted a systematic search on May 3, 2021, across four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Education Research Complete). Title/abstract and full-text screening was done in duplicate. One researcher extracted the data for each included article, and a second researcher checked data accuracy. The protocol was registered on Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YX7AU).

SUBJECTS: 

Articles related to sepsis awareness, knowledge, and information seeking behaviors among patients, public, and healthcare professionals.

INTERVENTIONS: 

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: 

Of 5,927 unique studies, 80 reported on patient (n = 13/80;16.3%), public (n = 15/80;18.8%), or healthcare professional (nurses, physicians, emergency medical technicians) (n = 48/80; 60%) awareness and knowledge of sepsis. Healthcare professional awareness and knowledge of sepsis is high compared with patients/public. The proportion of patients/public who had heard of the term sepsis ranged from 2% (Japan) to 88.6% (Germany). The proportions of patients/public who correctly identified the definition of sepsis ranged from 4.2% (Singapore) to 92% (Sweden). The results from the included studies appear to suggest that patient/public awareness of sepsis gradually improved over time. We found that the definition of sepsis was inconsistent in the literature and that few studies reported on patient, public, or healthcare professional knowledge of sepsis risk factors. Most patient/public get their sepsis information from the internet, whereas healthcare professionals get it from their role in healthcare through job training or educational training.

CONCLUSIONS: 

Patient, public, and healthcare professional awareness and knowledge of sepsis vary globally. Future research may benefit from a consistent definition as well as country-specific data to support targeted public awareness campaigns.

中文翻译：

---

患者、公众和医疗保健专业人员的脓毒症意识、知识和信息寻求行为：范围界定审查*

目标： 

脓毒症意识和理解是脓毒症预防、识别和临床管理的重要方面。我们进行了范围界定审查，以识别和绘制与脓毒症意识、常识和信息寻求行为相关的文献，目的是为未来的脓毒症研究和知识转化活动提供信息。

设计： 

范围审查。

环境： 

使用 Arksey 和 O'Malley 的方法论框架，我们于 2021 年 5 月 3 日在四个数据库（MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL 和 Education Research Complete）中进行了系统检索。标题/摘要和全文筛选一式两份进行。一名研究人员提取了每一篇包含的文章的数据，另一名研究人员检查了数据的准确性。该协议已在开放科学框架（ https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YX7AU ）上注册。

科目： 

与患者、公众和医疗保健专业人员的脓毒症意识、知识和信息寻求行为相关的文章。

干预措施： 

没有任何。

测量和主要结果： 

在 5,927 项独特研究中，有 80 项报告针对患者 ( n = 13/80;16.3%)、公众 ( n = 15/80;18.8%) 或医疗保健专业人员（护士、医生、急救医疗技术人员）( n = 48/80 ; 60%) 对脓毒症的认识和了解。与患者/公众相比，医疗保健专业人员对脓毒症的认识和了解较高。听说过脓毒症一词的患者/公众比例范围为 2%（日本）至 88.6%（德国）。正确识别脓毒症定义的患者/公众比例从 4.2%（新加坡）到 92%（瑞典）不等。纳入研究的结果似乎表明，患者/公众对脓毒症的认识随着时间的推移逐渐提高。我们发现文献中脓毒症的定义不一致，并且很少有研究报告患者、公众或医疗保健专业人士对脓毒症危险因素的了解。大多数患者/公众从互联网上获取脓毒症信息，而医疗保健专业人员通过工作培训或教育培训从他们在医疗保健中的角色中获取这些信息。

结论： 

全球范围内，患者、公众和医疗保健专业人士对脓毒症的认识和了解各不相同。未来的研究可能会受益于一致的定义以及特定国家的数据，以支持有针对性的公众意识活动。