Early Sepsis Detection

Global Impact of Sepsis

Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated immune response to infection. The occurrence of sepsis is increasing at an annual rate of 1.5%, making it a significant global healthcare concern. Sepsis has a high mortality rate, killing more individuals than prostate cancer, breast cancer and HIV/AIDS combined.2,3,4 

In addition to the human toll, sepsis is costly to healthcare organizations. Sepsis-related costs—which may include longer hospital stays, ICU admissions, hospital readmissions and extensive testing and patient monitoring—surpass $24 billion.

The facts about sepsis

  • 1.7 million people are diagnosed with sepsis each year in the U.S.
  • 85% of septic patients enter the health system via the Emergency Department
  • Sepsis is the No. 1 cause of hospital readmission in the U.S.
  • In the U.S., sepsis is the costliest reason for hospitalization
  • 20% of patients with sepsis are rehospitalized within 30 days
  • There has been a 19% increase in sepsis treatment spending from 2011–2013

Sepsis facts infographic

Download sepsis facts infographic ›

Importance of Early Sepsis Detection and Treatment 

Mortality from severe sepsis and sepsis shock improves by 7.6% per hour with early and appropriate administration of antibiotics.9 Early identification and treatment of sepsis can also reduce the cost of sepsis-related care.10,11

Emergency Department clinicians play a unique role as the first line of care for acutely ill patients. While the ability to triage patients, identify sepsis and initiate treatment is vitally important, diagnosing sepsis remains a challenge. Symptoms are often unclear and non-specific, ultimately resulting in delayed treatment for many patients.

Video One Young Man's Survival Story

When her son fell ill, this mom suspected a stomach virus. Initially, so did the doctors. What happened next was a series of unfortunate events, followed by a life-saving discovery: The young man had sepsis. Find out what led to this young man’s eventual diagnosis and watch as he and his mom describe how a breakthrough technology for early sepsis detection could spare others the harrowing experience they had.

Watch video

Early Sepsis Indicator Application Know sooner, act faster

The Early Sepsis Indicator is a first-in-class regulatory-cleared hematologic biomarker that is reported as part of a routine complete blood count (CBC) with differential test for adults entering through the Emergency Department. The Early Sepsis Indicator Application is the quantitative measurement of Monocyte Distribution Width (MDW). Measuring changes in monocyte morphology, the Early Sepsis indicator provides valuable and actionable information to clinicians. Together with other laboratory findings and clinical information, a positive Early Sepsis Indicator result alerts clinicians to a higher probability of sepsis along with the CBC with differential results. Knowing sooner about a patient’s risk for sepsis guides clinical decision making when time is of the essence.     

The benefits of the Early Sepsis Indicator

  • Receive clinically relevant answers, sooner. Results are reported as part of the initial CBC with differential test, which is often available in less than 60 minutes. This can provide an earlier alert to possible sepsis or developing sepsis when added to the current standard of care
  • Enable earlier escalation of clinical decision making. By rapidly delivering information to Emergency Department clinicians, the Early Sepsis Indicator can potentially provide an alert to sepsis before clinical symptoms are clear
  • Obtain results without added workflow burden. The Early Sepsis Indicator is part of routine blood work for adults in the ED, so there is no additional test to order
Sepsis marker

Webinar MDW: Early Identification of Sepsis in the Emergency Department

Hear Dr. Crouser from Ohio State University review sepsis epidemiology, definitions and implications and introduce a new sepsis biomarker, Monocyte Distribution Width to aid in early detection of sepsis in the Emergency Department. Additionally, hear Nan West from Truman Medical Center share a septic patient case study of diagnostic challenges, importance of early identification of sepsis and explain the role of MDW.

Watch webinar

Resources Supporting Early Sepsis Detection 

Explore resources supporting the importance of early sepsis detection and timely patient care.

Novel Parameter Unaffected by Hematological Malignancy or Neutropenia

Discover how monocyte distribution width (MDW) detects sepsis early for ED patients. This multicenter study establishes that the novel MDW parameter performs equally well for patients with and without hematological malignancy and neutropenia.

Improved Early Detection of Sepsis in the ED 

Patients with sepsis most often enter the hospital through the ED, and delayed detection can impact adverse outcomes. Clinicians often use white blood cell (WBC) counts to help identify sepsis, but changes in WBC alone have limited utility for sepsis. Learn how volumetric changes in circulating monocytes can add value to the WBC count for early sepsis detection in the ED.

The Role of Monocytes in the Progression of Sepsis

Monocytes perform multiple immunological functions and play a role in the immune response to sepsis. By measuring monocyte morphological changes, the Early Sepsis Indicator can inform clinical decisions related to sepsis for better-targeted treatment.

Emergency department physician with patient

Know Sooner: Early Sepsis Indicator

The Early Sepsis Indicator alerts clinicians to sepsis or the risk of developing sepsis in their patients in the Emergency Department. This unique hematology-based solution uses near native-state cellular characterization and detects changes in monocyte morphology to give early, rapid insight without added workflow burden. 

Learn more

Additional Resource

For more information about sepsis, visit Global Sepsis Alliance
Global Sepsis Alliance


1Sepsis Alliance. “Fact Sheet 2018.” Sepsis.org. Accessed 6 Mar. 2019.
2Vidant Beaufort Hospital. “The Third-leading Cause of Death: Sepsis.” www.thewashingtondailynews.com/2017/07/08/the-third-leading-cause-of-death-sepsis/, 8 Jul. 2017. Accessed 19 Mar. 2018.
3Kumar G, Kumar N, Taneja A et al. "Nationwide Trends of Severe Sepsis in the Twenty First Century (2000–2007)." Chest, vol. 16. 2011, pp. 1223–31. doi: 10.1378/chest.11-0352.
4Hall MJ, Williams SJ, DeFrances CJ, Golosinsky A. "Inpatient Care for Septicemia or Sepsis: A Challenge for Patients and Hospitals." ww.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db62.pdf, Jun. 2011. Accessed 2 May 2018.
5Perman SM, Goyal M, Gaieski DF. "Initial Emergency Department Diagnosis and Management of Adult Patients with Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock." Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med, 20, 41. 2012. doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-20-41.
6Torio C, Moore B. “National Inpatient Hospital Costs: The Most Expensive Conditions by Payer.” www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb204-Most-Expensive-Hospital-Conditions.pdf, May 2016. Accessed 15 Jan. 2018.
7Angus, DC et al. “Epidemiology of Severe Sepsis in the United States: Analysis of Incidence, Outcome, and Associated Costs of Care.” Crit Care Med, vol. 29. 2001, pp. 1303–10.
8Fingar K. “Trends in Hospital Readmissions for Four High-volume Conditions, 2009–2013.” www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb196-Readmissions-Trends-High-Volume-Conditions.jsp, November 2015. Accessed 15 Jan. 2018.
9Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE et al. “Duration of Hypotension Before Initiation of Effective Antimicrobial Therapy is the Critical Determinant of Survival in Human Septic Shock.” Crit Care Med, vol. 34, no. 6. 2006, pp. 1589–96. 
10Jones SL et al. “Reductions in Sepsis Mortality and Costs After Design and Implementation of a Nurse-based Early Recognition and Response Program.” Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf, vol. 41, no. 11. 2015, pp. 483–91.
11Judd WR, Stephens DM, Kennedy DA. “Clinical and Economic Impact of a Quality Improvement Initiative to Enhance Early Recognition and Treatment of Sepsis.” Ann Pharmacol, vol. 48, no. 10. 2014, pp. 1269–75.