Talk:Sepsis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Medicine / Translation (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Translation task force (marked as High-importance).
 



Does sepsis increase long-term mortality[edit]

Not necessarily doi:10.1186/s13054-016-1276-7 JFW | T@lk 14:30, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Prehospital care[edit]

... has been poorly studied despite its importance in remote areas. doi:10.1136/emermed-2015-205261 JFW | T@lk 09:37, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

"Septicaemia" got lost on the way[edit]

It redirects here, but is not mentioned anywhere (unless you count in the caption of the WWII propaganda poster). I am a layman, but judging by the paper quoted here below, they're not fully synonymous. So?
Sepsis, septicaemia, sepsis syndrome, and septic shock: the correct definition and use.
Thanks, Arminden

We say "The terms septicemia and blood poisoning referred to the microorganisms or their toxins in the blood and are no longer commonly used" in the lead
Added it to the body aswell [1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:07, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks. I had given a search for "septicaemia" and it didn't show up. Because of the spelling! Will take care of it now. Cheers, ArmindenArminden (talk) 08:14, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

What is the name of the sysmptomes caused by wounding oneself with a contaminated object (eg: rusty nails and the like)? I expected the article for sepsis cover this accident as well as the onset of typical symtomes and the necessary steps to be taken in such cases. what I found instead, is an article with a very broad, generic idea of sepsis as contrasted to the old fashioned blood poisononing and with absolutely no practical information regarding the later. I appreciate science's developement, that implies now the meaning of sepsis in a much broader term than what i was told as a child about getting sick with blood poisoning when a wound caused by some a dirty, soiled, or rusty object is not given proper care, but i wish that the information regarding latter would be not hidden from the public. The poster used for illustration does mention "scratch" through which sepsis can be caused, which impies, that in those dark times people were aware of the dangers of "a rusty nail caused wound". Its sad, tht this is not available knowledge anymore. I think this article needs a section dealing with the "blood poisoning caused by a wound", even if the term itself fell out of favor.

176.63.176.112 (talk) 22:45, 29 December 2016 (UTC).

Well, I guess i was looking for Tetanus. Still, just to avoid confusion, the article probably could make a mention of both conditions and a warning against confusion of one with the other. 176.63.176.112 (talk) 23:08, 29 December 2016 (UTC).

No, the tetanus article does not deal with "blood poisoning from an infected wound", so I am still at loss. Probably the proverbial blood poisoning is just any kind of wound infection that could be caused by a wide variety of bacteria. I am still wondering, why this condition is not covered in any of the related articles. 176.63.176.112 (talk) 23:31, 29 December 2016 (UTC).

You are probably thinking of a systemic bacterial infection originating from a wound. 'Blood poisoning' is sometimes used to refer to this in popular conversation, even if there is no sepsis. Tetanus is something different and much more specific. --Ef80 (talk) 13:57, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Copyedit[edit]

Although comprehensive and well referenced, some of this article is written in very clunky English and it would benefit from a copyedit. I don't intend to do this myself as I don't want to run the risk of inadvertently modifying information. --Ef80 (talk) 13:47, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

sam[edit]

sam roche — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.244.101.41 (talk) 12:06, 9 February 2017 (UTC)