Early clinical evaluation of a vendor developed pediatric artificial intelligence sepsis model in the emergency department.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Swaminathan Kandaswamy, Evan W Orenstein, Naveen Muthu, Andrea McCarter, Nikolay Braykov, Jonathan M Beus, Edwin Ray, Tal Senior, Sara P Brown, Rebekah Carter, MaryBeth Gleeson, Hannah Thummel, John Cheng, Thuy Bui, Reena Blanco, Kiran Hebbar, James Fortenberry, Srikant B Iyer, Mark V Mai
{"title":"Early clinical evaluation of a vendor developed pediatric artificial intelligence sepsis model in the emergency department.","authors":"Swaminathan Kandaswamy, Evan W Orenstein, Naveen Muthu, Andrea McCarter, Nikolay Braykov, Jonathan M Beus, Edwin Ray, Tal Senior, Sara P Brown, Rebekah Carter, MaryBeth Gleeson, Hannah Thummel, John Cheng, Thuy Bui, Reena Blanco, Kiran Hebbar, James Fortenberry, Srikant B Iyer, Mark V Mai","doi":"10.1093/jamia/ocaf105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To conduct an independent external validation of an implemented vendor-developed emergency department (ED) pediatric sepsis predictive model.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective cross-sectional study within 2 ED sites of a large pediatric health system between January 1, 2021 and April 1, 2024. A nurse-facing interruptive alert appeared when the model score exceeded the threshold, triggering clinicians to call a sepsis huddle. We compared model predictive performance with vendor-reported performance using definitions that accounted for model threshold and alert timing in clinical practice. Care processes and patient outcome measures included time to first antibiotics, time to first fluid bolus, 30-day mortality, ED to ICU admission rate, and ICU free days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The pre-intervention cohort consisted of 268 102 ED visits with 741 (0.28%) sepsis cases. The post-intervention cohort consisted of 331 061 ED visits with 1114 (0.34%) sepsis cases. Model predictive performance dropped from vendor-reported performance. Mean time to first antibiotic decreased from 112 to 102 minutes (P = .05, 95% confidence interval of difference, -19.1 to 0.1) and time to first bolus decreased by 16.7 minutes (P = .03, 95% confidence interval difference, -31.8 to -1.5) after the intervention. Decreases in 30-day mortality (6% [45/741] to 4% [52/1114]); ED to ICU admissions (87% [646/741] to 84% [941/1114]), and ICU free days (6 to 5) after the intervention did not meet statistical significance.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Implementing the model led to significant reductions in time to fluid bolus and borderline decreases in time to antibiotics, with non-significant changes in mortality and ICU metrics. When implementing an externally developed model, local workflows, documentation patterns, and patient populations make it challenging to generalize published or reported model performance metrics to real world performance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When tailoring a vendor-developed pediatric ED sepsis model for real-world usage, predictive performance differed substantially. Post-implementation we found improvements in care process measures, suggesting such models may benefit sepsis care when adapted for specific clinical workflows.</p>","PeriodicalId":50016,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaf105","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To conduct an independent external validation of an implemented vendor-developed emergency department (ED) pediatric sepsis predictive model.

Materials and methods: We performed a retrospective cross-sectional study within 2 ED sites of a large pediatric health system between January 1, 2021 and April 1, 2024. A nurse-facing interruptive alert appeared when the model score exceeded the threshold, triggering clinicians to call a sepsis huddle. We compared model predictive performance with vendor-reported performance using definitions that accounted for model threshold and alert timing in clinical practice. Care processes and patient outcome measures included time to first antibiotics, time to first fluid bolus, 30-day mortality, ED to ICU admission rate, and ICU free days.

Results: The pre-intervention cohort consisted of 268 102 ED visits with 741 (0.28%) sepsis cases. The post-intervention cohort consisted of 331 061 ED visits with 1114 (0.34%) sepsis cases. Model predictive performance dropped from vendor-reported performance. Mean time to first antibiotic decreased from 112 to 102 minutes (P = .05, 95% confidence interval of difference, -19.1 to 0.1) and time to first bolus decreased by 16.7 minutes (P = .03, 95% confidence interval difference, -31.8 to -1.5) after the intervention. Decreases in 30-day mortality (6% [45/741] to 4% [52/1114]); ED to ICU admissions (87% [646/741] to 84% [941/1114]), and ICU free days (6 to 5) after the intervention did not meet statistical significance.

Discussion: Implementing the model led to significant reductions in time to fluid bolus and borderline decreases in time to antibiotics, with non-significant changes in mortality and ICU metrics. When implementing an externally developed model, local workflows, documentation patterns, and patient populations make it challenging to generalize published or reported model performance metrics to real world performance.

Conclusion: When tailoring a vendor-developed pediatric ED sepsis model for real-world usage, predictive performance differed substantially. Post-implementation we found improvements in care process measures, suggesting such models may benefit sepsis care when adapted for specific clinical workflows.

早期临床评估供应商开发的儿科人工智能败血症模型在急诊科。
目的:对供应商开发的急诊科(ED)儿童败血症预测模型进行独立的外部验证。材料和方法:我们在2021年1月1日至2024年4月1日期间对一个大型儿科卫生系统的2个ED站点进行了回顾性横断面研究。当模型得分超过阈值时,会出现面向护士的中断警报,触发临床医生召开败血症会议。我们将模型预测性能与供应商报告的性能进行了比较,使用的定义考虑了模型阈值和临床实践中的警报时间。护理过程和患者结果测量包括首次使用抗生素的时间、首次输液的时间、30天死亡率、急诊科到ICU的入院率和ICU空闲天数。结果:干预前队列包括268 102次急诊就诊,其中741例败血症(0.28%)。干预后队列包括331 061例急诊就诊,其中1114例(0.34%)败血症。模型预测性能低于供应商报告的性能。使用第一种抗生素的平均时间从112分钟减少到102分钟(P =。0.05,差异的95%置信区间为-19.1 ~ 0.1),第一次服药时间缩短16.7分钟(P = 0.05)。03, 95%置信区间差,-31.8至-1.5)。降低30天死亡率(6%[45/741]至4% [52/1114]);ED对ICU入院率(87%[646/741]~ 84%[941/1114]),干预后ICU空闲天数(6 ~ 5)差异无统计学意义。讨论:实施该模型可显著缩短输液时间和临界缩短抗生素使用时间,死亡率和ICU指标无显著变化。在实现外部开发的模型时,本地工作流、文档模式和患者群体使得将发布或报告的模型性能指标推广到真实世界的性能具有挑战性。结论:当将供应商开发的儿科ED脓毒症模型用于实际使用时,预测性能显着不同。实施后,我们发现在护理过程措施的改进,表明这种模式可能有利于败血症护理时,适应特定的临床工作流程。
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
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 医学-计算机:跨学科应用
CiteScore
14.50
自引率
7.80%
发文量
230
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JAMIA is AMIA''s premier peer-reviewed journal for biomedical and health informatics. Covering the full spectrum of activities in the field, JAMIA includes informatics articles in the areas of clinical care, clinical research, translational science, implementation science, imaging, education, consumer health, public health, and policy. JAMIA''s articles describe innovative informatics research and systems that help to advance biomedical science and to promote health. Case reports, perspectives and reviews also help readers stay connected with the most important informatics developments in implementation, policy and education.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信