Systematic review and longitudinal analysis of implementing Artificial Intelligence to predict clinical deterioration in adult hospitals: what is known and what remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors influencing implementation of machine learning algorithms (MLAs) that predict clinical deterioration in hospitalized adult patients and relate these to a validated implementation framework. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of studies of implemented or trialed real-time clinical deterioration prediction MLAs was undertaken, which identified: how MLA implementation was measured; impact of MLAs on clinical processes and patient outcomes; and barriers, enablers and uncertainties within the implementation process. Review findings were then mapped to the SALIENT end-to-end implementation framework to identify the implementation stages at which these factors applied. RESULTS: Thirty-seven articles relating to 14 groups of MLAs were identified, each trialing or implementing a bespoke algorithm. One hundred and seven distinct implementation evaluation metrics were identified. Four groups reported decreased hospital mortality, 1 significantly. We identified 24 barriers, 40 enablers, and 14 uncertainties and mapped these to the 5 stages of the SALIENT implementation framework. DISCUSSION: Algorithm performance across implementation stages decreased between in silico and trial stages. Silent plus pilot trial inclusion was associated with decreased mortality, as was the use of logistic regression algorithms that used less than 39 variables. Mitigation of alert fatigue via alert suppression and threshold configuration was commonly employed across groups. CONCLUSIONS: : There is evidence that real-world implementation of clinical deterioration prediction MLAs may improve clinical outcomes. Various factors identified as influencing success or failure of implementation can be mapped to different stages of implementation, thereby providing useful and practical guidance for implementers.

Recognition and Management of Hospital-Acquired Sepsis Among Older General Medical Inpatients: A Multi-Site Retrospective Study.

Purpose: To assess accuracy of early diagnosis, appropriateness and timeliness of response, and clinical outcomes of older general medical inpatients with hospital-acquired sepsis. Methods: Hospital abstracts of inpatient encounters from seven digital Queensland public hospitals between July 2018 and September 2020 were screened retrospectively for diagnoses of hospital-acquired sepsis. Electronic medical records were retrieved and cases meeting selection criteria and classified as confirmed or probable sepsis using pre-specified criteria were included. Investigations and treatments following the first digitally generated alert of clinical deterioration were compared with a best practice sepsis care bundle. Outcome measures comprised 30-day all-cause mortality after deterioration, and unplanned readmissions at 14 days after discharge. Results: Of the 169 screened care episodes, 59 comprised probable or confirmed cases of sepsis treated by general medicine teams at the time of initial deterioration. Of these, 43 (72.9%) had no mention of sepsis in the differential diagnosis on first medical review, and only 38 (64%) were managed as having sepsis. Each care bundle component of blood cultures, serum lactate, and intravenous fluid resuscitation and antibiotics was only delivered in approximately 30% of cases, and antibiotic administration was delayed more than an hour in 28 of 38 (73.7%) cases. Conclusion: Early recognition of sepsis and timely implementation of care bundles are challenging in older general medical patients. Education programs in sepsis care standards targeting nurses and junior medical staff, closer patient monitoring, and post-discharge follow-up may improve patient outcomes.