Validation of a Natural Language Processing Algorithm using National Reporting Data to Improve Identification of Anesthesia-related ADVerse evENTs: The "ADVENTURE" Study.

Adverse events Artificial intelligence Natural Language Processing Quality improvement patient safety

Journal

Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine
ISSN: 2352-5568
Titre abrégé: Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med
Pays: France
ID NLM: 101652401

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 May 2024
Historique:
received: 12 11 2023
revised: 02 04 2024
accepted: 22 04 2024
medline: 9 5 2024
pubmed: 9 5 2024
entrez: 8 5 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Reporting and analysis of adverse events (AE) is associated with improved healthcare learning, quality outcomes, and patient safety. Manual text analysis is time-consuming, costly, and prone to human errors. We aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of machine learning and natural language processing (NLP) approaches for early predictions of adverse events and provide input to direct quality improvement and patient safety initiatives. We used machine learning to analyze 9,559 continuously reported AE by clinicians and healthcare systems to the French National Health accreditor (HAS) between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2020, for a total of 135,000 unique de-identified AE reports. We validated the labeling and determined the associations between different root causes and patient consequences. The model was validated by independent expert anesthesiologists. The machine learning and Artificial Intelligence (AI) model trained on 9,559 AE datasets accurately categorized 8800 (88%) of reported AE. The three most frequent AE types were "difficult orotracheal intubation" (16.9% of AE reports), "medication error" (10.5%), and "post-induction hypotension" (6.9%). The accuracy of the AI model reached 70.9% sensitivity, 96.6% specificity for "difficult intubation", 43.2% sensitivity, and 98.9% specificity for "medication error." This unsupervised method provides an accurate, automated, AI-supported search algorithm that ranks and helps to understand complex patterns of risky patient situations and has greater speed, precision, and clarity when compared to manual human data extraction. Machine learning (ML) and natural language processing models can effectively be used to process natural language AE reports and augment expert clinician input. This model can support clinical applications and methodological standards of implementations and be used to better inform and enhance decision-making for improved risk management and patient safety. The study was approved by the ethics committee of the French Society of Anesthesiology (IRB 00010254-2020-20) and the CNIL (CNIL: 118 58 95) and the study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT: NCT05185479).

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Reporting and analysis of adverse events (AE) is associated with improved healthcare learning, quality outcomes, and patient safety. Manual text analysis is time-consuming, costly, and prone to human errors. We aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of machine learning and natural language processing (NLP) approaches for early predictions of adverse events and provide input to direct quality improvement and patient safety initiatives.
METHODS METHODS
We used machine learning to analyze 9,559 continuously reported AE by clinicians and healthcare systems to the French National Health accreditor (HAS) between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2020, for a total of 135,000 unique de-identified AE reports. We validated the labeling and determined the associations between different root causes and patient consequences. The model was validated by independent expert anesthesiologists.
RESULTS RESULTS
The machine learning and Artificial Intelligence (AI) model trained on 9,559 AE datasets accurately categorized 8800 (88%) of reported AE. The three most frequent AE types were "difficult orotracheal intubation" (16.9% of AE reports), "medication error" (10.5%), and "post-induction hypotension" (6.9%). The accuracy of the AI model reached 70.9% sensitivity, 96.6% specificity for "difficult intubation", 43.2% sensitivity, and 98.9% specificity for "medication error."
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
This unsupervised method provides an accurate, automated, AI-supported search algorithm that ranks and helps to understand complex patterns of risky patient situations and has greater speed, precision, and clarity when compared to manual human data extraction. Machine learning (ML) and natural language processing models can effectively be used to process natural language AE reports and augment expert clinician input. This model can support clinical applications and methodological standards of implementations and be used to better inform and enhance decision-making for improved risk management and patient safety.
TRIAL REGISTRATION BACKGROUND
The study was approved by the ethics committee of the French Society of Anesthesiology (IRB 00010254-2020-20) and the CNIL (CNIL: 118 58 95) and the study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT: NCT05185479).

Identifiants

pubmed: 38718923
pii: S2352-5568(24)00048-1
doi: 10.1016/j.accpm.2024.101390
pii:
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT05185479']

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

101390

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

Auteurs

Paul M Mertes (PM)

Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, EA 3072, FMTS de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.

Claire Morgand (C)

Evaluation Department and Tools for Quality and Safety of Care, French national authority for health, Saint Denis, France.

Paul Barach (P)

Thomas Jefferson School of Medicine, Philadelphia, USA; Sigmund Freud University, Vienna, Austria.

Geoffrey Jurkolow (G)

CFAR - Collège Français des Anesthésistes-Réanimateurs, 75016 Paris, France. Electronic address: Geoffrey.Jurkolow@gmail.com.

Karen E Assmann (KE)

Evaluation Department and Tools for Quality and Safety of Care, French national authority for health, Saint Denis, France.

Edouard Dufetelle (E)

Collective Thinking, 23 rue Yves Toudic, 75010 Paris, France.

Vincent Susplugas (V)

Collective Thinking, 23 rue Yves Toudic, 75010 Paris, France.

Bilal Alauddin (B)

Collective Thinking, 23 rue Yves Toudic, 75010 Paris, France.

Patrick Georges Yavordios (PG)

CFAR - Collège Français des Anesthésistes-Réanimateurs, 75016 Paris, France.

Jean Tourres (J)

CFAR - Collège Français des Anesthésistes-Réanimateurs, 75016 Paris, France.

Jean-Marc Dumeix (JM)

CFAR - Collège Français des Anesthésistes-Réanimateurs, 75016 Paris, France.

Xavier Capdevila (X)

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5, France; Inserm Unit 1298 Montpellier NeuroSciences Institute, Montpellier University, 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5, France.

Classifications MeSH