ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Timely intervention for clinically deteriorating ward patients requires that care teams accurately diagnose and treat their underlying medical conditions. However, the most common diagnoses leading to deterioration and the relevant therapies provided are poorly characterized. Therefore, we aimed to determine the diagnoses responsible for clinical deterioration, the relevant diagnostic tests ordered, and the treatments administered among high-risk ward patients using manual chart review. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective observational study. SETTING: Inpatient medical-surgical wards at four health systems from 2006-2020 PATIENTS: Randomly selected patients (1,000 from each health system) with clinical deterioration, defined by reaching the 95th percentile of a validated early warning score, electronic Cardiac Arrest Risk Triage (eCART), were included. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Clinical deterioration was confirmed by a trained reviewer or marked as a false alarm if no deterioration occurred for each patient. For true deterioration events, the condition causing deterioration, relevant diagnostic tests ordered, and treatments provided were collected. Of the 4,000 included patients, 2,484 (62%) had clinical deterioration confirmed by chart review. Sepsis was the most common cause of deterioration (41%; n=1,021), followed by arrhythmia (19%; n=473), while liver failure had the highest in-hospital mortality (41%). The most common diagnostic tests ordered were complete blood counts (47% of events), followed by chest x-rays (42%), and cultures (40%), while the most common medication orders were antimicrobials (46%), followed by fluid boluses (34%), and antiarrhythmics (19%). CONCLUSIONS: We found that sepsis was the most common cause of deterioration, while liver failure had the highest mortality. Complete blood counts and chest x-rays were the most common diagnostic tests ordered, and antimicrobials and fluid boluses were the most common medication interventions. These results provide important insights for clinical decision-making at the bedside, training of rapid response teams, and the development of institutional treatment pathways for clinical deterioration. KEY POINTS: Question: What are the most common diagnoses, diagnostic test orders, and treatments for ward patients experiencing clinical deterioration? Findings: In manual chart review of 2,484 encounters with deterioration across four health systems, we found that sepsis was the most common cause of clinical deterioration, followed by arrythmias, while liver failure had the highest mortality. Complete blood counts and chest x-rays were the most common diagnostic test orders, while antimicrobials and fluid boluses were the most common treatments. Meaning: Our results provide new insights into clinical deterioration events, which can inform institutional treatment pathways, rapid response team training, and patient care.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Automated and data-driven methods for screening using natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning may replace resource-intensive manual approaches in the usual care of patients hospitalized with conditions related to unhealthy substance use. The rigorous evaluation of tools that use artificial intelligence (AI) is necessary to demonstrate effectiveness before system-wide implementation. An NLP tool to use routinely collected data in the electronic health record was previously validated for diagnostic accuracy in a retrospective study for screening unhealthy substance use. Our next step is a noninferiority design incorporated into a research protocol for clinical implementation with prospective evaluation of clinical effectiveness in a large health system. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to provide a study protocol to evaluate health outcomes and the costs and benefits of an AI-driven automated screener compared to manual human screening for unhealthy substance use. METHODS: A pre-post design is proposed to evaluate 12 months of manual screening followed by 12 months of automated screening across surgical and medical wards at a single medical center. The preintervention period consists of usual care with manual screening by nurses and social workers and referrals to a multidisciplinary Substance Use Intervention Team (SUIT). Facilitated by a NLP pipeline in the postintervention period, clinical notes from the first 24 hours of hospitalization will be processed and scored by a machine learning model, and the SUIT will be similarly alerted to patients who flagged positive for substance misuse. Flowsheets within the electronic health record have been updated to capture rates of interventions for the primary outcome (brief intervention/motivational interviewing, medication-assisted treatment, naloxone dispensing, and referral to outpatient care). Effectiveness in terms of patient outcomes will be determined by noninferior rates of interventions (primary outcome), as well as rates of readmission within 6 months, average time to consult, and discharge rates against medical advice (secondary outcomes) in the postintervention period by a SUIT compared to the preintervention period. A separate analysis will be performed to assess the costs and benefits to the health system by using automated screening. Changes from the pre- to postintervention period will be assessed in covariate-adjusted generalized linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: The study will begin in September 2022. Monthly data monitoring and Data Safety Monitoring Board reporting are scheduled every 6 months throughout the study period. We anticipate reporting final results by June 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The use of augmented intelligence for clinical decision support is growing with an increasing number of AI tools. We provide a research protocol for prospective evaluation of an automated NLP system for screening unhealthy substance use using a noninferiority design to demonstrate comprehensive screening that may be as effective as manual screening but less costly via automated solutions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03833804; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03833804. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/42971.
ABSTRACT
We evaluated associations of smoking heaviness markers and the effects of smoking cessation on the intestinal microbiota and cardiovascular disease risk factors in current smokers undertaking a quit attempt. Participants were current smokers enrolled in a prospective randomized clinical trial of smoking cessation therapies with visits at baseline, 2, and 12 weeks. Genomic DNA was extracted from fecal samples followed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing and analysis using the QIIME2 software workflow. Relative abundances of bacterial taxa and alpha- and beta-diversity measures were used for comparisons. The 36 smokers were (mean (standard deviation)) 51.5 (11.1) years old (42% male) and smoked 15.1 (6.4) cigarettes per day for 22.7 (11.9) pack-years. Relative abundances of the phylum Actinobacteria correlated with pack-years (rho = -0.44, p = 0.008) and Cyanobacteria correlated with CO levels (rho = 0.39, p = 0.021). After 12 weeks, relative abundances of the phylum Bacteroidetes increased (pANCOVA = 0.048) and Firmicutes decreased (pANCOVA = 0.036) among abstainers compared to continuing smokers. Increases in alpha-diversity were associated with heart rates (rho = -0.59, p = 0.037), systolic blood pressures (rho = -0.58, p = 0.043), and C-reactive protein (rho = -0.60, p = 0.034). Smoking cessation led to minor changes in the intestinal microbiota. It is unclear if the proven health benefits of smoking cessation lead to salutary changes in the intestinal microbiota.
