Retrospective Observational Study of the Clinical Performance Characteristics of a Machine Learning Approach to Early Sepsis Identification.
early warning system
machine learning
sepsis
sepsis recognition
Journal
Critical care explorations
ISSN: 2639-8028
Titre abrégé: Crit Care Explor
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101746347
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2019
Sep 2019
Historique:
entrez:
14
3
2020
pubmed:
14
3
2020
medline:
14
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To estimate performance characteristics and impact on care processes of a machine learning, early sepsis recognition tool embedded in the electronic medical record. Retrospective review of electronic medical records and outcomes to determine sepsis prevalence among patients about whom a warning was received in real time and timing of that warning compared with clinician recognition of potential sepsis as determined by actions documented in the electronic medical record. Acute care, nonteaching hospital. Patients in the emergency department, observation unit, and adult inpatient care units who had sepsis diagnosed either by clinical codes or by Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock: Management Bundle (SEP-1) criteria for severe sepsis and patients who had machine learning-generated advisories about a high risk of sepsis. Noninterventional study. Using two different definitions of sepsis as "true" sepsis, we measured the sensitivity and early warning clinical utility. Using coded sepsis to define true positives, we measured the positive predictive value of the early warnings. Sensitivity was 28.6% and 43.6% for coded sepsis and severe sepsis, respectively. The positive predictive value of an alert was 37.9% for coded sepsis. Clinical utility (true positive and earlier advisory than clinical recognition) was 2.2% and 1.6% for the two different definitions of sepsis. Use of the tool did not improve sepsis mortality rates. Performance characteristics were different than previously described in this retrospective assessment of real-time warnings. Real-world testing of retrospectively validated models is essential. The early warning clinical utility may vary depending on a hospital's state of sepsis readiness and embrace of sepsis order bundles.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32166288
doi: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000046
pmc: PMC7063939
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e0046Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.
Références
N Engl J Med. 2014 May 1;370(18):1673-6
pubmed: 24738642
Crit Care Med. 2018 Oct;46(10):1585-1591
pubmed: 30015667
Ann Emerg Med. 2019 Apr;73(4):334-344
pubmed: 30661855
Eur J Intern Med. 2017 Nov;45:46-50
pubmed: 28965741
JAMA. 2018 Oct 9;320(14):1433-1434
pubmed: 30242350
J Hosp Med. 2019 Jun 19;14(7):445-447
pubmed: 31251151
Lancet Oncol. 2019 Feb;20(2):166-167
pubmed: 30583847
JAMA. 2017 Feb 28;317(8):847-848
pubmed: 28114603
J Hosp Med. 2019 Mar;14(3):138-143
pubmed: 30811318
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Jul 18;(3):CD005529
pubmed: 17636805
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2015 Oct;12(10):1514-9
pubmed: 26288388
BMJ Open Respir Res. 2017 Nov 9;4(1):e000234
pubmed: 29435343
BMJ Open Qual. 2017 Oct 25;6(2):e000158
pubmed: 29450295
West J Emerg Med. 2017 Aug;18(5):951-956
pubmed: 28874949