Using machine learning for process improvement in sepsis management

IF 1.1 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
L.D. Ferreira , D. McCants , S. Velamuri
{"title":"Using machine learning for process improvement in sepsis management","authors":"L.D. Ferreira ,&nbsp;D. McCants ,&nbsp;S. Velamuri","doi":"10.1016/j.jhqr.2022.09.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>In the U.S., sepsis afflicts 1.7 million adults, causing 270,000 deaths each year. Early detection of sepsis could decrease the number of deaths by 92,000 annually and decrease hospital expenditures by 1.5 billion USD. Few prior studies and reviews have presented a holistic understanding of the relationship between machine learning and existing process improvement measures. This study, in addition to discussing machine learning and existing process improvements measures, elaborates on the disadvantages and the barriers to integrating machine learning into the clinic. This article synthesizes previous studies to educate healthcare professionals on effectively managing sepsis by leveraging the benefits of machine learning.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study used the PubMed database. Search terms include <em>sepsis antibiotics</em>, <em>sepsis process improvement</em>, <em>sepsis machine learning</em>. Our search criteria included previous studies published between January 1, 2017, and February 1, 2022.</p></div><div><h3>Results/discussion</h3><p>Although machine learning algorithms have better predictive capabilities, their effectiveness in the clinical setting is limited as studies show mixed results because the medical staff often fails to intervene. To overcome poor interventional response, clinicians need to work with the facility's IT department to ensure integration into clinical workflow and minimize alert-fatigue. Algorithms should enhance the productivity of clinical teams, not attempt to replace them entirely.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Hospitals can employ process improvement measures that effectively utilize machine learning algorithms to ensure integration into clinical workflows. Healthcare professionals can utilize workflow tools in addition to the predictive capabilities of machine learning to enhance clinical decisions in sepsis.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37347,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2603647922000859","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction

In the U.S., sepsis afflicts 1.7 million adults, causing 270,000 deaths each year. Early detection of sepsis could decrease the number of deaths by 92,000 annually and decrease hospital expenditures by 1.5 billion USD. Few prior studies and reviews have presented a holistic understanding of the relationship between machine learning and existing process improvement measures. This study, in addition to discussing machine learning and existing process improvements measures, elaborates on the disadvantages and the barriers to integrating machine learning into the clinic. This article synthesizes previous studies to educate healthcare professionals on effectively managing sepsis by leveraging the benefits of machine learning.

Methods

This study used the PubMed database. Search terms include sepsis antibiotics, sepsis process improvement, sepsis machine learning. Our search criteria included previous studies published between January 1, 2017, and February 1, 2022.

Results/discussion

Although machine learning algorithms have better predictive capabilities, their effectiveness in the clinical setting is limited as studies show mixed results because the medical staff often fails to intervene. To overcome poor interventional response, clinicians need to work with the facility's IT department to ensure integration into clinical workflow and minimize alert-fatigue. Algorithms should enhance the productivity of clinical teams, not attempt to replace them entirely.

Conclusion

Hospitals can employ process improvement measures that effectively utilize machine learning algorithms to ensure integration into clinical workflows. Healthcare professionals can utilize workflow tools in addition to the predictive capabilities of machine learning to enhance clinical decisions in sepsis.

使用机器学习改进败血症管理过程。
简介:在美国,败血症折磨着170万成年人,每年造成27万人死亡。败血症的早期发现可以每年减少92000人的死亡人数,并减少15亿美元的医院支出。很少有先前的研究和综述对机器学习和现有过程改进措施之间的关系有全面的理解。本研究除了讨论机器学习和现有的过程改进措施外,还阐述了将机器学习融入临床的缺点和障碍。这篇文章综合了以前的研究,以教育医疗保健专业人员通过利用机器学习的好处来有效管理败血症。方法:本研究采用PubMed数据库。搜索词包括败血症抗生素、败血症过程改进、败血症机器学习。我们的搜索标准包括2017年1月1日至2022年2月1日期间发表的先前研究。结果/讨论:尽管机器学习算法具有更好的预测能力,但其在临床环境中的有效性有限,因为研究显示结果喜忧参半,因为医务人员往往无法进行干预。为了克服不良的介入反应,临床医生需要与该机构的IT部门合作,以确保整合到临床工作流程中,并最大限度地减少警报疲劳。算法应该提高临床团队的生产力,而不是试图完全取代它们。结论:医院可以采取流程改进措施,有效地利用机器学习算法,确保集成到临床工作流程中。除了机器学习的预测能力外,医疗保健专业人员还可以利用工作流工具来增强败血症的临床决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
83
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Revista de Calidad Asistencial (Quality Healthcare) (RCA) is the official Journal of the Spanish Society of Quality Healthcare (Sociedad Española de Calidad Asistencial) (SECA) and is a tool for the dissemination of knowledge and reflection for the quality management of health services in Primary Care, as well as in Hospitals. It publishes articles associated with any aspect of research in the field of public health and health administration, including health education, epidemiology, medical statistics, health information, health economics, quality management, and health policies. The Journal publishes 6 issues, exclusively in electronic format. The Journal publishes, in Spanish, Original works, Special and Review Articles, as well as other sections. Articles are subjected to a rigorous, double blind, review process (peer review)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信