伤口成像软件和数字平台,帮助使用患者智能手机审查手术伤口:人工智能的发展和评估(WISDOM AI研究)。

IF 2.6 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
PLoS ONE Pub Date : 2024-12-09 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0315384
Melissa Rochon, Judith Tanner, James Jurkiewicz, Jacqueline Beckhelling, Akuha Aondoakaa, Keith Wilson, Luxmi Dhoonmoon, Max Underwood, Lara Mason, Roy Harris, Karen Cariaga
{"title":"伤口成像软件和数字平台,帮助使用患者智能手机审查手术伤口:人工智能的发展和评估(WISDOM AI研究)。","authors":"Melissa Rochon, Judith Tanner, James Jurkiewicz, Jacqueline Beckhelling, Akuha Aondoakaa, Keith Wilson, Luxmi Dhoonmoon, Max Underwood, Lara Mason, Roy Harris, Karen Cariaga","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0315384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Surgical patients frequently experience post-operative complications at home. Digital remote monitoring of surgical wounds via image-based systems has emerged as a promising solution for early detection and intervention. However, the increased clinician workload from reviewing patient-submitted images presents a challenge. This study utilises artificial intelligence (AI) to prioritise surgical wound images for clinician review, aiming to efficiently manage workload.</p><p><strong>Methods and analysis: </strong>Conducted from September 2023 to March 2024, the study phases included compiling a training dataset of 37,974 images, creating a testing set of 3,634 images, developing an AI algorithm using 'You Only Look Once' models, and conducting prospective tests compared against clinical nurse specialists' evaluations. The primary objective was to validate the AI's sensitivity in prioritising wound reviews, alongside assessing intra-rater reliability. Secondary objectives focused on specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for various wound features.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The AI demonstrated a sensitivity of 89%, exceeding the target of 85% and proving effective in identifying cases requiring priority review. Intra-rater reliability was perfect, achieving 100% consistency in repeated assessments. Observations indicated variations in detecting wound characteristics across different skin tones; sensitivity was notably lower for incisional separation and discolouration in darker skin tones. Specificity remained high overall, with some results favouring darker skin tones. The NPV were similar for both light and dark skin tones. However, the NPV was slightly higher for dark skin tones at 95% (95% CI: 93%-97%) compared to 91% (95% CI: 87%-92%) for light skin tones. Both PPV and NPV varied, especially in identifying sutures or staples, indicating areas needing further refinement to ensure equitable accuracy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The AI algorithm not only met but surpassed the expected sensitivity for identifying priority cases, showing high reliability. Nonetheless, the disparities in performance across skin tones, especially in recognising certain wound characteristics like discolouration or incisional separation, underline the need for ongoing training and adaptation of the AI to ensure fairness and effectiveness across diverse patient groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":"19 12","pages":"e0315384"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11627411/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wound imaging software and digital platform to assist review of surgical wounds using patient smartphones: The development and evaluation of artificial intelligence (WISDOM AI study).\",\"authors\":\"Melissa Rochon, Judith Tanner, James Jurkiewicz, Jacqueline Beckhelling, Akuha Aondoakaa, Keith Wilson, Luxmi Dhoonmoon, Max Underwood, Lara Mason, Roy Harris, Karen Cariaga\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pone.0315384\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Surgical patients frequently experience post-operative complications at home. Digital remote monitoring of surgical wounds via image-based systems has emerged as a promising solution for early detection and intervention. However, the increased clinician workload from reviewing patient-submitted images presents a challenge. This study utilises artificial intelligence (AI) to prioritise surgical wound images for clinician review, aiming to efficiently manage workload.</p><p><strong>Methods and analysis: </strong>Conducted from September 2023 to March 2024, the study phases included compiling a training dataset of 37,974 images, creating a testing set of 3,634 images, developing an AI algorithm using 'You Only Look Once' models, and conducting prospective tests compared against clinical nurse specialists' evaluations. The primary objective was to validate the AI's sensitivity in prioritising wound reviews, alongside assessing intra-rater reliability. Secondary objectives focused on specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for various wound features.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The AI demonstrated a sensitivity of 89%, exceeding the target of 85% and proving effective in identifying cases requiring priority review. Intra-rater reliability was perfect, achieving 100% consistency in repeated assessments. Observations indicated variations in detecting wound characteristics across different skin tones; sensitivity was notably lower for incisional separation and discolouration in darker skin tones. Specificity remained high overall, with some results favouring darker skin tones. The NPV were similar for both light and dark skin tones. However, the NPV was slightly higher for dark skin tones at 95% (95% CI: 93%-97%) compared to 91% (95% CI: 87%-92%) for light skin tones. Both PPV and NPV varied, especially in identifying sutures or staples, indicating areas needing further refinement to ensure equitable accuracy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The AI algorithm not only met but surpassed the expected sensitivity for identifying priority cases, showing high reliability. Nonetheless, the disparities in performance across skin tones, especially in recognising certain wound characteristics like discolouration or incisional separation, underline the need for ongoing training and adaptation of the AI to ensure fairness and effectiveness across diverse patient groups.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20189,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLoS ONE\",\"volume\":\"19 12\",\"pages\":\"e0315384\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11627411/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLoS ONE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0315384\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0315384","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言手术病人在家中经常会出现术后并发症。通过基于图像的系统对手术伤口进行数字远程监控,已成为早期检测和干预的一种有前途的解决方案。然而,审查患者提交的图像会增加临床医生的工作量,这是一项挑战。本研究利用人工智能(AI)对临床医生审查的手术伤口图像进行优先排序,旨在有效管理工作量:研究阶段从 2023 年 9 月至 2024 年 3 月,包括编制一个包含 37,974 张图像的训练数据集,创建一个包含 3,634 张图像的测试集,使用 "只看一次 "模型开发人工智能算法,并与临床护士专家的评估进行前瞻性测试比较。首要目标是验证人工智能在确定伤口复查优先次序方面的灵敏度,同时评估评分者内部的可靠性。次要目标是评估各种伤口特征的特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV):人工智能的灵敏度为 89%,超过了 85% 的目标值,并能有效识别需要优先复查的病例。评分者内部的可靠性非常高,重复评估的一致性达到 100%。观察结果表明,不同肤色的人在检测伤口特征方面存在差异;肤色较深的人对切口分离和变色的敏感度明显较低。特异性总体上仍然很高,但有些结果更倾向于深肤色。浅肤色和深肤色的 NPV 值相似。不过,深肤色的 NPV 略高,为 95%(95% CI:93%-97%),而浅肤色为 91%(95% CI:87%-92%)。PPV 和 NPV 均有差异,尤其是在识别缝合线或订书钉方面,这表明需要进一步改进以确保公平的准确性:人工智能算法在识别重点病例方面不仅达到了预期的灵敏度,而且超过了预期的灵敏度,显示出很高的可靠性。尽管如此,不同肤色患者的表现仍存在差异,尤其是在识别某些伤口特征(如变色或切口分离)方面,这凸显了对人工智能进行持续培训和调整的必要性,以确保在不同患者群体中的公平性和有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Wound imaging software and digital platform to assist review of surgical wounds using patient smartphones: The development and evaluation of artificial intelligence (WISDOM AI study).

Wound imaging software and digital platform to assist review of surgical wounds using patient smartphones: The development and evaluation of artificial intelligence (WISDOM AI study).

Wound imaging software and digital platform to assist review of surgical wounds using patient smartphones: The development and evaluation of artificial intelligence (WISDOM AI study).

Wound imaging software and digital platform to assist review of surgical wounds using patient smartphones: The development and evaluation of artificial intelligence (WISDOM AI study).

Introduction: Surgical patients frequently experience post-operative complications at home. Digital remote monitoring of surgical wounds via image-based systems has emerged as a promising solution for early detection and intervention. However, the increased clinician workload from reviewing patient-submitted images presents a challenge. This study utilises artificial intelligence (AI) to prioritise surgical wound images for clinician review, aiming to efficiently manage workload.

Methods and analysis: Conducted from September 2023 to March 2024, the study phases included compiling a training dataset of 37,974 images, creating a testing set of 3,634 images, developing an AI algorithm using 'You Only Look Once' models, and conducting prospective tests compared against clinical nurse specialists' evaluations. The primary objective was to validate the AI's sensitivity in prioritising wound reviews, alongside assessing intra-rater reliability. Secondary objectives focused on specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for various wound features.

Results: The AI demonstrated a sensitivity of 89%, exceeding the target of 85% and proving effective in identifying cases requiring priority review. Intra-rater reliability was perfect, achieving 100% consistency in repeated assessments. Observations indicated variations in detecting wound characteristics across different skin tones; sensitivity was notably lower for incisional separation and discolouration in darker skin tones. Specificity remained high overall, with some results favouring darker skin tones. The NPV were similar for both light and dark skin tones. However, the NPV was slightly higher for dark skin tones at 95% (95% CI: 93%-97%) compared to 91% (95% CI: 87%-92%) for light skin tones. Both PPV and NPV varied, especially in identifying sutures or staples, indicating areas needing further refinement to ensure equitable accuracy.

Conclusion: The AI algorithm not only met but surpassed the expected sensitivity for identifying priority cases, showing high reliability. Nonetheless, the disparities in performance across skin tones, especially in recognising certain wound characteristics like discolouration or incisional separation, underline the need for ongoing training and adaptation of the AI to ensure fairness and effectiveness across diverse patient groups.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE 生物-生物学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
14242
审稿时长
3.7 months
期刊介绍: PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides: * Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright * Fast publication times * Peer review by expert, practicing researchers * Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact * Community-based dialogue on articles * Worldwide media coverage
×
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