A Scoping Review of Integrated Medical Devices and Clinical Decision Support in the Acute Care Setting.

BACKGROUND: Seamless data integration between point-of-care medical devices and the electronic health record (EHR) can be central to clinical decision support systems (CDSS). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to (1) examine the existing evidence related to integrated medical devices, primarily medication pump devices, and associated clinical decision support (CDS) in acute care settings and (2) to identify how acute care clinicians may use device CDS in clinical decision-making. The rationale for this review is that integrated devices are ubiquitous in the acute care setting, and they generate data that may help to contribute to the situational awareness of the clinical team necessary to provide individualized patient care. METHODS: This scoping review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extensions for Scoping Review guidelines. PubMed, CINAHL, IEEE Xplore, and Scopus databases were searched for scholarly, peer-reviewed journals indexed between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2020. A priori inclusion criteria were established. RESULTS: Of the 1,924 articles screened, 18 were ultimately included for synthesis, and primarily included articles on devices such as intravenous medication pumps and vital signs machines. Clinical alarm burden was mentioned in most of the articles, and despite not including the term "medication" there were many articles about smart pumps being integrated with the EHR. The Revised Technology, Nursing & Patient Safety Conceptual Model provided the organizational framework. Ten articles described patient assessment, monitoring, or surveillance use. Three articles described patient protection from harm. Four articles described direct care use scenarios, all of which described insulin administration. One article described a hybrid situation of patient communication and monitoring. Most of the articles described devices and decision support primarily used by registered nurses (RNs). CONCLUSION: The articles in this review discussed devices and the associated CDSS that are used by clinicians, primarily RNs, in the daily provision of care for patients. Integrated device data provide insight into user-device interactions and help to illustrate health care processes, especially the activities when providing direct care to patients in an acute care setting. While there are CDSS designed to support the clinician while working with devices, RNs and providers may disregard this guidance, and defer to their own expertise. Additionally, if clinicians perceive CDSS as intrusive, they are at risk for alarm and alert fatigue if CDSS are not tailored to sync with the workflow of the end-user. Areas for future research include refining inclusion criteria to examine the evidence for devices and their CDS that are most likely used by other groups' health care professionals (i.e., doctors and therapists), using integrated device metadata and deep learning analytics to identify patterns in care delivery, and decision support tools for patients using their own personal data.

Factors Influencing Clinician Trust in Predictive Clinical Decision Support Systems for In-Hospital Deterioration: Qualitative Descriptive Study.

BACKGROUND: Clinician trust in machine learning-based clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) for predicting in-hospital deterioration (a type of predictive CDSS) is essential for adoption. Evidence shows that clinician trust in predictive CDSSs is influenced by perceived understandability and perceived accuracy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the phenomenon of clinician trust in predictive CDSSs for in-hospital deterioration by confirming and characterizing factors known to influence trust (understandability and accuracy), uncovering and describing other influencing factors, and comparing nurses' and prescribing providers' trust in predictive CDSSs. METHODS: We followed a qualitative descriptive methodology conducting directed deductive and inductive content analysis of interview data. Directed deductive analyses were guided by the human-computer trust conceptual framework. Semistructured interviews were conducted with nurses and prescribing providers (physicians, physician assistants, or nurse practitioners) working with a predictive CDSS at 2 hospitals in Mass General Brigham. RESULTS: A total of 17 clinicians were interviewed. Concepts from the human-computer trust conceptual framework-perceived understandability and perceived technical competence (ie, perceived accuracy)-were found to influence clinician trust in predictive CDSSs for in-hospital deterioration. The concordance between clinicians' impressions of patients' clinical status and system predictions influenced clinicians' perceptions of system accuracy. Understandability was influenced by system explanations, both global and local, as well as training. In total, 3 additional themes emerged from the inductive analysis. The first, perceived actionability, captured the variation in clinicians' desires for predictive CDSSs to recommend a discrete action. The second, evidence, described the importance of both macro- (scientific) and micro- (anecdotal) evidence for fostering trust. The final theme, equitability, described fairness in system predictions. The findings were largely similar between nurses and prescribing providers. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is a perceived trade-off between machine learning-based CDSS accuracy and understandability, our findings confirm that both are important for fostering clinician trust in predictive CDSSs for in-hospital deterioration. We found that reliance on the predictive CDSS in the clinical workflow may influence clinicians' requirements for trust. Future research should explore the impact of reliance, the optimal explanation design for enhancing understandability, and the role of perceived actionability in driving trust.

Clinician and Health Care Leaders' Experiences with-and Perceptions of-COVID-19 Documentation Reduction Policies and Practices.

BACKGROUND: Substantial strategies to reduce clinical documentation were implemented by health care systems throughout the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at national and local levels. This natural experiment provides an opportunity to study the impact of documentation reduction strategies on documentation burden among clinicians and other health professionals in the United States. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess clinicians' and other health care leaders' experiences with and perceptions of COVID-19 documentation reduction strategies and identify which implemented strategies should be prioritized and remain permanent post-pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a national survey of clinicians and health care leaders to understand COVID-19 documentation reduction strategies implemented during the pandemic using snowball sampling through professional networks, listservs, and social media. We developed and validated a 19-item survey leveraging existing post-COVID-19 policy and practice recommendations proposed by Sinsky and Linzer. Participants rated reduction strategies for impact on documentation burden on a scale of 0 to 100. Free-text responses were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 351 surveys initiated, 193 (55%) were complete. Most participants were informaticians and/or clinicians and worked for a health system or in academia. A majority experienced telehealth expansion (81.9%) during the pandemic, which participants also rated as highly impactful (60.1-61.5) and preferred that it remain (90.5%). Implemented at lower proportions, documenting only pertinent positives to reduce note bloat (66.1 ± 28.3), changing compliance rules and performance metrics to eliminate those without evidence of net benefit (65.7 ± 26.3), and electronic health record (EHR) optimization sprints (64.3 ± 26.9) received the highest impact scores compared with other strategies presented; support for these strategies widely ranged (49.7-63.7%). CONCLUSION: The results of this survey suggest there are many perceived sources of and solutions for documentation burden. Within strategies, we found considerable support for telehealth, documenting pertinent positives, and changing compliance rules. We also found substantial variation in the experience of documentation burden among participants.

Characterizing Multitasking and Workflow Fragmentation in Electronic Health Records among Emergency Department Clinicians: Using Time-Motion Data to Understand Documentation Burden.

BACKGROUND: The impact of electronic health records (EHRs) in the emergency department (ED) remains mixed. Dynamic and unpredictable, the ED is highly vulnerable to workflow interruptions. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study is to understand multitasking and task fragmentation in the clinical workflow among ED clinicians using clinical information systems (CIS) through time-motion study (TMS) data, and inform their applications to more robust and generalizable measures of CIS-related documentation burden. METHODS: Using TMS data collected among 15 clinicians in the ED, we investigated the role of documentation burden, multitasking (i.e., performing physical and communication tasks concurrently), and workflow fragmentation in the ED. We focused on CIS-related tasks, including EHRs. RESULTS: We captured 5,061 tasks and 877 communications in 741 locations within the ED. Of the 58.7 total hours observed, 44.7% were spent on CIS-related tasks; nearly all CIS-related tasks focused on data-viewing and data-entering. Over one-fifth of CIS-related task time was spent on multitasking. The mean average duration among multitasked CIS-related tasks was shorter than non-multitasked CIS-related tasks (20.7 s vs. 30.1 s). Clinicians experienced 1.4 ± 0.9 task switches/min, which increased by one-third when multitasking. Although multitasking was associated with a significant increase in the average duration among data-entering tasks, there was no significant effect on data-viewing tasks. When engaged in CIS-related task switches, clinicians were more likely to return to the same CIS-related task at higher proportions while multitasking versus not multitasking. CONCLUSION: Multitasking and workflow fragmentation may play a significant role in EHR documentation among ED clinicians, particularly among data-entering tasks. Understanding where and when multitasking and workflow fragmentation occurs is a crucial step to assessing potentially burdensome clinician tasks and mitigating risks to patient safety. These findings may guide future research on developing more scalable and generalizable measures of CIS-related documentation burden that do not necessitate direct observation techniques (e.g., EHR log files).

Measurement of clinical documentation burden among physicians and nurses using electronic health records: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: . OBJECTIVE: Electronic health records (EHRs) are linked with documentation burden resulting in clinician burnout. While clear classifications and validated measures of burnout exist, documentation burden remains ill-defined and inconsistently measured. We aim to conduct a scoping review focused on identifying approaches to documentation burden measurement and their characteristics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews (ScR) guidelines, we conducted a scoping review assessing MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL from inception to April 2020 for studies investigating documentation burden among physicians and nurses in ambulatory or inpatient settings. Two reviewers evaluated each potentially relevant study for inclusion/exclusion criteria. RESULTS: Of the 3482 articles retrieved, 35 studies met inclusion criteria. We identified 15 measurement characteristics, including 7 effort constructs: EHR usage and workload, clinical documentation/review, EHR work after hours and remotely, administrative tasks, cognitively cumbersome work, fragmentation of workflow, and patient interaction. We uncovered 4 time constructs: average time, proportion of time, timeliness of completion, activity rate, and 11 units of analysis. Only 45.0% of studies assessed the impact of EHRs on clinicians and/or patients and 40.0% mentioned clinician burnout. DISCUSSION: Standard and validated measures of documentation burden are lacking. While time and effort were the core concepts measured, there appears to be no consensus on the best approach nor degree of rigor to study documentation burden. CONCLUSION: Further research is needed to reliably operationalize the concept of documentation burden, explore best practices for measurement, and standardize its use.

Clinician involvement in research on machine learning-based predictive clinical decision support for the hospital setting: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: The study sought to describe the prevalence and nature of clinical expert involvement in the development, evaluation, and implementation of clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) that utilize machine learning to analyze electronic health record data to assist nurses and physicians in prognostic and treatment decision making (ie, predictive CDSSs) in the hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, and IEEE Xplore and hand-searching of relevant conference proceedings were conducted to identify eligible articles. Empirical studies of predictive CDSSs using electronic health record data for nurses or physicians in the hospital setting published in the last 5 years in peer-reviewed journals or conference proceedings were eligible for synthesis. Data from eligible studies regarding clinician involvement, stage in system design, predictive CDSS intention, and target clinician were charted and summarized. RESULTS: Eighty studies met eligibility criteria. Clinical expert involvement was most prevalent at the beginning and late stages of system design. Most articles (95%) described developing and evaluating machine learning models, 28% of which described involving clinical experts, with nearly half functioning to verify the clinical correctness or relevance of the model (47%). DISCUSSION: Involvement of clinical experts in predictive CDSS design should be explicitly reported in publications and evaluated for the potential to overcome predictive CDSS adoption challenges. CONCLUSIONS: If present, clinical expert involvement is most prevalent when predictive CDSS specifications are made or when system implementations are evaluated. However, clinical experts are less prevalent in developmental stages to verify clinical correctness, select model features, preprocess data, or serve as a gold standard.

Time-motion examination of electronic health record utilization and clinician workflows indicate frequent task switching and documentation burden.

Clinical documentation burden has been broadly acknowledged, yet few interprofessional measures of burden exist. Using interprofessional time-motion study (TMS) data, we evaluated clinical workflows with a focus on electronic health record (EHR) utilization and fragmentation among 47 clinicians: 34 advanced practice providers (APPs) and 13 registered nurses (RNs) from: an acute care unit (n=15 observations [obs]), intensive care unit (nobs=14), ambulatory clinic (nobs=3), and emergency department (nobs=15). We examined workflow fragmentation, task-switch type, and task involvement. In our study, clinicians on average exhibited 1.4±0.6 switches per minute in their workflow. Eighty-four (19.6%) of the 429 task-switch types presented in the data accounted for 80.1% of all switches. Among those, data viewing- and data entry-related tasks were involved in 48.2% of all switches, indicating documentation burden may play a critical role in workflow disruptions. Therefore, interruption rate evaluated through task switches may serve as a proxy for measuring burden.

Mining clinical phrases from nursing notes to discover risk factors of patient deterioration.

OBJECTIVE: Early identification and treatment of patient deterioration is crucial to improving clinical outcomes. To act, hospital rapid response (RR) teams often rely on nurses' clinical judgement typically documented narratively in the electronic health record (EHR). We developed a data-driven, unsupervised method to discover potential risk factors of RR events from nursing notes. METHODS: We applied multiple natural language processing methods, including language modelling, word embeddings, and two phrase mining methods (TextRank and NC-Value), to identify quality phrases that represent clinical entities from unannotated nursing notes. TextRank was used to determine the important word-sequences in each note. NC-Value was then used to globally rank the locally-important sequences across the whole corpus. We evaluated our method both on its accuracy compared to human judgement and on the ability of the mined phrases to predict a clinical outcome, RR event hazard. RESULTS: When applied to 61,740 hospital encounters with 1,067 RR events and 778,955 notes, our method achieved an average precision of 0.590 to 0.764 (when excluding numeric tokens). Time-dependent covariates Cox model using the phrases achieved a concordance index of 0.739. Clustering the phrases revealed clinical concepts significantly associated with RR event hazard. DISCUSSION: Our findings demonstrate that our minimal-annotation, unsurprised method can rapidly mine quality phrases from a large amount of nursing notes, and these identified phrases are useful for downstream tasks, such as clinical outcome predication and risk factor identification.

Unsupervised Machine Learning of Topics Documented by Nurses about Hospitalized Patients Prior to a Rapid-Response Event.

BACKGROUND: In the hospital setting, it is crucial to identify patients at risk for deterioration before it fully develops, so providers can respond rapidly to reverse the deterioration. Rapid response (RR) activation criteria include a subjective component ("worried about the patient") that is often documented in nurses' notes and is hard to capture and quantify, hindering active screening for deteriorating patients. OBJECTIVES: We used unsupervised machine learning to automatically discover RR event risk/protective factors from unstructured nursing notes. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we obtained nursing notes of hospitalized, nonintensive care unit patients, documented from 2015 through 2018 from Partners HealthCare databases. We applied topic modeling to those notes to reveal topics (clusters of associated words) documented by nurses. Two nursing experts named each topic with a representative Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine-Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT) concept. We used the concepts along with vital signs and demographics in a time-dependent covariates extended Cox model to identify risk/protective factors for RR event risk. RESULTS: From a total of 776,849 notes of 45,299 patients, we generated 95 stable topics, of which 80 were mapped to 72 distinct SNOMED CT concepts. Compared with a model containing only demographics and vital signs, the latent topics improved the model's predictive ability from a concordance index of 0.657 to 0.720. Thirty topics were found significantly associated with RR event risk at a 0.05 level, and 11 remained significant after Bonferroni correction of the significance level to 6.94E-04, including physical examination (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.12), informing doctor (HR = 1.05, 95% CI, 1.03-1.08), and seizure precautions (HR = 1.08, 95% CI, 1.04-1.12). CONCLUSION: Unsupervised machine learning methods can automatically reveal interpretable and informative signals from free-text and may support early identification of patients at risk for RR events.