Skip to main content

Abstract Submission


Presenters are required to submit a presentation abstract by March 20 at 5 PM. The following instructions must be followed to ensure the submission will be accepted.

Residents and fellows will submit the following information. Please ensure that the submission has been reviewed by all project mentors and co-investigators for clarity and content accuracy. Residents and fellows will proofread their submission carefully to ensure the posted abstract has no errors in flow, grammar or spelling.

The following items will be submitted online for review by the Mountain States Conference planning committee. This information will also be included with the electronic conference materials.

Presenter name: Enter the full name of the presenter without credentials. This should be the person serving as the project lead or primary investigator.
– Example: Sally Resident

Co-investigator names: Enter the full name of each co-investigator or project participant, separated by semicolons. Do not include credentials with the names. Include only those people actively involved in the development of the project and its results.
– Example: John Preceptor; Jill Pharmacy; David Provider

Institution name, city and state: Enter the name of the facility or organization where the resident or fellow is practicing. In the appropriate spaces, include the institution/organization name, city, and state.
– Example: Community Health System, Springfield, Utah

Abstract title: The title will contain no more than 150 characters with spaces. Only capitalize the first word, proper nouns and acronyms. The title should clearly express the nature of the research or project. The title must not mislead the audience regarding the topic or project results.
– Example: The rate of appropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis in an ICU before and after implementation of a pharmacist-driven protocol

Abstract body: The body of the abstract must not exceed 400 words. The abstract should briefly provide and accurate overview of the project that will be presented at the conference. It must include the following information in a single paragraph:

  • Introduction and background
  • Methods
  • Results (If no results or partial results are available, include a statement of this status.)
  • Conclusions
  • IRB status

Presentation Category: Select up to three of the following categories that best describe the project that will be presented at Mountain States Conference.

  • Academia
  • Acute Internal Medicine
  • Administration / Operations
  • Ambulatory Care
  • Anticoagulation
  • Cardiology
  • Community Pharmacy
  • Critical Care
  • Hot Topics
  • Infectious Diseases
  • Medication Safety / Policy
  • Neurology / Psychiatry
  • Oncology / Immunology / Transplant
  • Pain / Opioids
  • Pediatrics / Women's Health

Presenter’s professional areas of interest: The presenter should include a brief list of practice or topic areas related to their professional goals or career planning.
– Example: Drug Information; Medication Safety; Diabetes Management

Sample Abstract:

Monitoring adherence to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign in the surgical ICU

Erin Lingenfelter; Nick Lonardo; Gabrielle Baraghoshi; Edward Kimball.  University of Utah Hospital, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Patients presenting with severe septic shock have a mortality rate of 50-60 percent. Mounting evidence suggests that severe sepsis is a time-sensitive disease state and adherence to bundle sets for resuscitation and management may improve survival. This study examined surgical ICU (SICU) performance in the management of severe septic shock as it compares to the bundle recommendations made by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC). All patients admitted to the SICU administered norepinephrine, dopamine, or vasopressin were identified through the Project Impact database. Patient charts were reviewed and included if they had two or more severe inflammatory response syndrome criteria and a strong suspicion of infection at the time of vasopressor administration. An electronic and hardcopy chart review was preformed to document the primary outcome of absolute adherence to the SSC resuscitation and management bundle sets both separate and in combination. Secondary outcomes included mortality rate, rate of assessment for activated protein C use and adrenal insufficiency, SICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and time on mechanical ventilation. This data will be used in future monitoring of SSC bundle set adherence and mortality outcomes. Results will be presented. (IRB approved)

-Used with author’s permission

For additional questions regarding abstract submissions, please contact