Clinical Prediction Models for Hospital-Induced Delirium Using Structured and Unstructured Electronic Health Record Data: Protocol for a Development and Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-induced delirium is one of the most common and costly iatrogenic conditions, and its incidence is predicted to increase as the population of the United States ages. An academic and clinical interdisciplinary systems approach is needed to reduce the frequency and impact of hospital-induced delirium. OBJECTIVE: The long-term goal of our research is to enhance the safety of hospitalized older adults by reducing iatrogenic conditions through an effective learning health system. In this study, we will develop models for predicting hospital-induced delirium. In order to accomplish this objective, we will create a computable phenotype for our outcome (hospital-induced delirium), design an expert-based traditional logistic regression model, leverage machine learning techniques to generate a model using structured data, and use machine learning and natural language processing to produce an integrated model with components from both structured data and text data. METHODS: This study will explore text-based data, such as nursing notes, to improve the predictive capability of prognostic models for hospital-induced delirium. By using supervised and unsupervised text mining in addition to structured data, we will examine multiple types of information in electronic health record data to predict medical-surgical patient risk of developing delirium. Development and validation will be compliant to the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) statement. RESULTS: Work on this project will take place through March 2024. For this study, we will use data from approximately 332,230 encounters that occurred between January 2012 to May 2021. Findings from this project will be disseminated at scientific conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. CONCLUSIONS: Success in this study will yield a durable, high-performing research-data infrastructure that will process, extract, and analyze clinical text data in near real time. This model has the potential to be integrated into the electronic health record and provide point-of-care decision support to prevent harm and improve quality of care. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/48521.

Use of a Data Repository to Identify Delirium as a Presenting Symptom of COVID-19 Infection in Hospitalized Adults: Cross-Sectional Cohort Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Delirium, an acute confusional state highlighted by inattention, has been reported to occur in 10% to 50% of patients with COVID-19. People hospitalized with COVID-19 have been noted to present with or develop delirium and neurocognitive disorders. Caring for patients with delirium is associated with more burden for nurses, clinicians, and caregivers. Using information in electronic health record data to recognize delirium and possibly COVID-19 could lead to earlier treatment of the underlying viral infection and improve outcomes in clinical and health care systems cost per patient. Clinical data repositories can further support rapid discovery through cohort identification tools, such as the Informatics for Integrating Biology and the Bedside tool. OBJECTIVE: The specific aim of this research was to investigate delirium in hospitalized older adults as a possible presenting symptom in COVID-19 using a data repository to identify neurocognitive disorders with a novel group of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes. METHODS: We analyzed data from 2 catchment areas with different demographics. The first catchment area (7 counties in the North-Central Florida) is predominantly rural while the second (1 county in North Florida) is predominantly urban. The Integrating Biology and the Bedside data repository was queried for patients with COVID-19 admitted to inpatient units via the emergency department (ED) within the health center from April 1, 2020, and April 1, 2022. Patients with COVID-19 were identified by having a positive COVID-19 laboratory test or a diagnosis code of U07.1. We identified neurocognitive disorders as delirium or encephalopathy, using ICD-10 codes. RESULTS: Less than one-third (1437/4828, 29.8%) of patients with COVID-19 were diagnosed with a co-occurring neurocognitive disorder. A neurocognitive disorder was present on admission for 15.8% (762/4828) of all patients with COVID-19 admitted through the ED. Among patients with both COVID-19 and a neurocognitive disorder, 56.9% (817/1437) were aged ≥65 years, a significantly higher proportion than those with no neurocognitive disorder (P<.001). The proportion of patients aged <65 years was significantly higher among patients diagnosed with encephalopathy only than patients diagnosed with delirium only and both delirium and encephalopathy (P<.001). Most (1272/4828, 26.3%) patients with COVID-19 admitted through the ED during our study period were admitted during the Delta variant peak. CONCLUSIONS: The data collected demonstrated that an increased number of older patients with neurocognitive disorder present on admission were infected with COVID-19. Knowing that delirium increases the staffing, nursing care needs, hospital resources used, and the length of stay as previously noted, identifying delirium early may benefit hospital administration when planning for newly anticipated COVID-19 surges. A robust and accessible data repository, such as the one used in this study, can provide invaluable support to clinicians and clinical administrators in such resource reallocation and clinical decision-making.

Application of a practice-based approach in variable selection for a prediction model development study of hospital-induced delirium.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic models of hospital-induced delirium, that include potential predisposing and precipitating factors, may be used to identify vulnerable patients and inform the implementation of tailored preventive interventions. It is recommended that, in prediction model development studies, candidate predictors are selected on the basis of existing knowledge, including knowledge from clinical practice. The purpose of this article is to describe the process of identifying and operationalizing candidate predictors of hospital-induced delirium for application in a prediction model development study using a practice-based approach. METHODS: This study is part of a larger, retrospective cohort study that is developing prognostic models of hospital-induced delirium for medical-surgical older adult patients using structured data from administrative and electronic health records. First, we conducted a review of the literature to identify clinical concepts that had been used as candidate predictors in prognostic model development-and-validation studies of hospital-induced delirium. Then, we consulted a multidisciplinary task force of nine members who independently judged whether each clinical concept was associated with hospital-induced delirium. Finally, we mapped the clinical concepts to the administrative and electronic health records and operationalized our candidate predictors. RESULTS: In the review of 34 studies, we identified 504 unique clinical concepts. Two-thirds of the clinical concepts (337/504) were used as candidate predictors only once. The most common clinical concepts included age (31/34), sex (29/34), and alcohol use (22/34). 96% of the clinical concepts (484/504) were judged to be associated with the development of hospital-induced delirium by at least two members of the task force. All of the task force members agreed that 47 or 9% of the 504 clinical concepts were associated with hospital-induced delirium. CONCLUSIONS: Heterogeneity among candidate predictors of hospital-induced delirium in the literature suggests a still evolving list of factors that contribute to the development of this complex phenomenon. We demonstrated a practice-based approach to variable selection for our model development study of hospital-induced delirium. Expert judgement of variables enabled us to categorize the variables based on the amount of agreement among the experts and plan for the development of different models, including an expert-model and data-driven model.

Risk of bias in prognostic models of hospital-induced delirium for medical-surgical units: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to assess risk of bias in existing prognostic models of hospital-induced delirium for medical-surgical units. METHODS: APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched on July 8, 2022, to identify original studies which developed and validated prognostic models of hospital-induced delirium for adult patients who were hospitalized in medical-surgical units. The Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies was used for data extraction. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess risk of bias. Risk of bias was assessed across four domains: participants, predictors, outcome, and analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, including ten model development and validation studies and three model validation only studies. The methods in all of the studies were rated to be at high overall risk of bias. The methods of statistical analysis were the greatest source of bias. External validity of models in the included studies was tested at low levels of transportability. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the ongoing scientific challenge of developing a valid prognostic model of hospital-induced delirium for medical-surgical units to tailor preventive interventions to patients who are at high risk of this iatrogenic condition. With limited knowledge about generalizable prognosis of hospital-induced delirium in medical-surgical units, existing prognostic models should be used with caution when creating clinical practice policies. Future research protocols must include robust study designs which take into account the perspectives of clinicians to identify and validate risk factors of hospital-induced delirium for accurate and generalizable prognosis in medical-surgical units.

Clinical Decision Support Systems for Palliative Care Management: A Scoping Review.

CONTEXT: With the expansion of palliative care services in clinical settings, clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) have become increasingly crucial for assisting bedside nurses and other clinicians in improving the quality of care to patients with life-limiting health conditions. OBJECTIVES: To characterize palliative care CDSSs and explore end-users' actions taken, adherence recommendations, and clinical decision time. METHODS: The CINAHL, Embase, and PubMed databases were searched from inception to September 2022. The review was developed following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews guidelines. Qualified studies were described in tables and assessed the level of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 284 abstracts were screened, and 12 studies comprised the final sample. The CDSSs selected focused on identifying patients who could benefit from palliative care based on their health status, making referrals to palliative care services, and managing medications and symptom control. Despite the variability of palliative CDSSs, all studies reported that CDSSs assisted clinicians in becoming more informed about palliative care options leading to better decisions and improved patient outcomes. Seven studies explored the impact of CDSSs on end-user adherence. Three studies revealed high adherence to recommendations while four had low adherence. Lack of feature customization and trust in guideline-based in the initial stages of feasibility and usability testing were evident, limiting the usefulness for nurses and other clinicians. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that implementing palliative care CDSSs can assist nurses and other clinicians in improving the quality of care for palliative patients. The studies' different methodological approaches and variations in palliative CDSSs made it challenging to compare and validate the applicability under which CDSSs are effective. Further research utilizing rigorous methods to evaluate the impact of clinical decision support features and guideline-based actions on clinicians' adherence and efficiency is recommended.

Identification of important factors in an inpatient fall risk prediction model to improve the quality of care using EHR and electronic administrative data: A machine-learning approach.

BACKGROUND: Inpatient falls, many resulting in injury or death, are a serious problem in hospital settings. Existing falls risk assessment tools, such as the Morse Fall Scale, give a risk score based on a set of factors, but don't necessarily signal which factors are most important for predicting falls. Artificial intelligence (AI) methods provide an opportunity to improve predictive performance while also identifying the most important risk factors associated with hospital-acquired falls. We can glean insight into these risk factors by applying classification tree, bagging, random forest, and adaptive boosting methods applied to Electronic Health Record (EHR) data. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to use tree-based machine learning methods to determine the most important predictors of inpatient falls, while also validating each via cross-validation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A case-control study was designed using EHR and electronic administrative data collected between January 1, 2013 to October 31, 2013 in 14 medical surgical units. The data contained 38 predictor variables which comprised of patient characteristics, admission information, assessment information, clinical data, and organizational characteristics. Classification tree, bagging, random forest, and adaptive boosting methods were used to identify the most important factors of inpatient fall-risk through variable importance measures. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the ROC curve were computed via ten-fold cross validation and compared via pairwise t-tests. These methods were also compared to a univariate logistic regression of the Morse Fall Scale total score. RESULTS: In terms of AUROC, bagging (0.89), random forest (0.90), and boosting (0.89) all outperformed the Morse Fall Scale (0.86) and the classification tree (0.85), but no differences were measured between bagging, random forest, and adaptive boosting, at a p-value of 0.05. History of Falls, Age, Morse Fall Scale total score, quality of gait, unit type, mental status, and number of high fall risk increasing drugs (FRIDs) were considered the most important features for predicting inpatient fall risk. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning methods have the potential to identify the most relevant and novel factors for the detection of hospitalized patients at risk of falling, which would improve the quality of patient care, and to more fully support healthcare provider and organizational leadership decision-making. Nurses would be able to enhance their judgement to caring for patients at risk for falls. Our study may also serve as a reference for the development of AI-based prediction models of other iatrogenic conditions. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report the importance of patient, clinical, and organizational features based on the use of AI approaches.

Analyzing Analgesic Medications in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.

Objectives: Analyzing medication data for research purposes is complex, and methods are rarely described in the literature. Our objective was to describe methods of quantifying opioid and nonopioid analgesics and to compare the utility of five different analgesic coding methods when analyzing relationships between pain, analgesic use, and clinical outcomes. In this study, we used physical function as the outcome variable for its clinical relevance and its relationship to pain in older adults. Design: Secondary analyses of baseline cross-sectional data from the Advanced Cognitive Training Interventions for Vital Elders (ACTIVE) study. Setting: Community settings in six regions of the United States. Subjects: A total of 2,802 community-residing adults older than age 65 years. Methods: A medication audit was conducted. Analgesics were coded as any pain medication, counts (total analgesics, number of opioids and nonopioids), equianalgesics (oral morphine equivalents, oral acetaminophen equivalents), and dose categories. Adjuvant medications used to treat pain (e.g., tricyclic antidepressants and anticonvulsants) and low-dose aspirin typically used for cardiovascular conditions were excluded from these analyses. To examine the utility of these various approaches, a series of hierarchical regression models were conducted with pain and analgesics as predictors and physical functioning as the dependent variable. Results: Eighty-one point nine percent of participants reported experiencing recent pain, but 26% reported analgesic use. Nonopioids were the most common drug class used. Models revealed that pain was significantly associated with worse physical function (ß = -0.45, P = 0.001), after controlling for demographic and analgesic variables. Two basic drug coding methods (e.g., any pain medication, number of pain medications) were equivalent in their explanatory power (ß = -0.12, P = 0.001) and were slightly stronger predictors of function than the more complex coding procedures. Conclusions: Analgesic medications are important variables to consider in community-based studies of older adults. We illustrate several methods of quantifying analgesic medications for research purposes. In this community-based sample, we found no advantage of complex equianalgesic coding methods over simple counts in predicting physical functioning. The results may differ depending on the research question or clinical outcome studied. Thus, methods of analyzing analgesic drug data warrant further research.