Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Implementation approaches and barriers for rule-based and machine learning-based sepsis risk prediction tools: a qualitative study
47
Zitationen
4
Autoren
2022
Jahr
Abstract
Objective: Many options are currently available for sepsis surveillance clinical decision support (CDS) from electronic medical record (EMR) vendors, third party, and homegrown models drawing on rule-based (RB) and machine learning (ML) algorithms. This study explores sepsis CDS implementation from the perspective of implementation leads by describing the motivations, tool choices, and implementation experiences of a diverse group of implementers. Materials and Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with and a questionnaire was administered to 21 hospital leaders overseeing CDS implementation at 15 US medical centers. Participants were recruited via convenience sampling. Responses were coded by 2 coders with consensus approach and inductively analyzed for themes. Results: Use of sepsis CDS is motivated in part by quality metrics for sepsis patients. Choice of tool is driven by ease of integration, customization capability, and perceived predictive potential. Implementation processes for these CDS tools are complex, time-consuming, interdisciplinary undertakings resulting in heterogeneous choice of tools and workflow integration. To improve clinician acceptance, implementers addressed both optimization of the alerts as well as clinician understanding and buy in. More distrust and confusion was reported for ML models, as compared to RB models. Respondents described a variety of approaches to overcome implementation barriers; these approaches related to alert firing, content, integration, and buy-in. Discussion: While there are shared socio-technical challenges of implementing CDS for both RB and ML models, attention to user education, support, expectation management, and dissemination of effective practices may improve feasibility and effectiveness of ML models in quality improvement efforts. Conclusion: Further implementation science research is needed to determine real world efficacy of these tools. Clinician acceptance is a significant barrier to sepsis CDS implementation. Successful implementation of less clinically intuitive ML models may require additional attention to user confusion and distrust.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3)
2016 · 27.399 Zit.
pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves
2011 · 13.786 Zit.
APACHE II
1985 · 13.612 Zit.
Definitions for Sepsis and Organ Failure and Guidelines for the Use of Innovative Therapies in Sepsis
1992 · 13.186 Zit.
The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure
1996 · 11.518 Zit.