Myatra SN
Boyer KM
Hidalgo JL
Maves RC
Acharya SP
Jacob ST
Kortz TB
Nadkarni VM
Perez Cornejo MS
Perez-Fernandez J
Johnston C
Machado FR
Morrow BM
Coopersmith CM
Kissoon N
Molyneux E
Permpikul C
Piyavechviratana K
Rhodes A
Ulisubisya MM
Kumar VK
Patel H
Woznica D
Akech SO
Crit Care Med. 2026;
OBJECTIVES: Almost 80% of sepsis cases occur in low-resource settings (LRS), where limited resources impede the effective implementation of international guidelines for sepsis management. In addition, existing sepsis guidelines have not fully addressed specific issues relevant to LRS. Therefore, an international panel of 20 multiprofessional sepsis experts was convened to generate consensus on the gaps in and strategies for sepsis care in LRS. The recently developed "sepsis chain of survival" was used as a framework. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase. STUDY SELECTION: Studies selected included human studies (clinical trials, cohort, case-control, and case series) reporting clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis from LRS between January 1, 2000, and July 4, 2024. Search terms included "developing countries," "LMIC," "resource-poor settings," and regional terms such as Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America. The Delphi process involved iterative, anonymous voting by the expert panel to achieve consensus to draft clinical practice statements. DATA EXTRACTION: A detailed literature review was conducted using the "sepsis chain of survival" as a basis, with an emphasis on sepsis prevention, detection, therapy, post-sepsis care, education, and future research priorities. A total of 8865 studies were identified and screened, with 155 included in the review. DATA SYNTHESIS: Based on literature review, the Delphi process achieved a stable consensus for 58 of 62 (94%) of the proposed clinical practice statements after eight survey rounds. These statements offer guidance on measures to improve the prevention, early recognition and time-sensitive, comprehensive management of sepsis in LRS through the continuum of care from first response to post-sepsis care and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: There remains a significant lack of high-quality evidence to support improvements in sepsis care for patients in LRS. Pending new data, the clinical practice statements identified here complement the existing international guidelines for sepsis management by serving as a basis for immediate care and future research in LRS.
