Dataset Information

Effect of Evidence-based Clinical Decision Support on the Use and Yield of CT Pulmonary Angiographic Imaging in Hospitalized Patients.

ABSTRACT: To determine the effect of clinical decision support (CDS) on the use and yield of inpatient computed tomographic (CT) pulmonary angiography for acute pulmonary embolism (PE).This HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study with waiver of informed consent included all adults admitted to a 793-bed teaching hospital from April 1, 2007, to June 30, 2012. The CDS intervention, implemented after a baseline observation period, informed providers who placed an order for CT pulmonary angiographic imaging about the pretest probability of the study based on a validated decision rule. Use of CT pulmonary angiographic and admission data from administrative databases was obtained for this study. By using a validated natural language processing algorithm on radiology reports, each CT pulmonary angiographic examination was classified as positive or negative for acute PE. Primary outcome measure was monthly use of CT pulmonary angiography per 1000 admissions. Secondary outcome was CT pulmonary angiography yield (percentage of CT pulmonary angiographic examinations that were positive for acute PE). Linear trend analysis was used to assess for effect and trend differences in use and yield of CT pulmonary angiographic imaging before and after CDS.In 272 374 admissions over the study period, 5287 patients underwent 5892 CT pulmonary angiographic examinations. A 12.3% decrease in monthly use of CT pulmonary angiography (26.0 to 22.8 CT pulmonary angiographic examinations per 1000 admissions before and after CDS, respectively; P = .008) observed 1 month after CDS implementation was sustained over the ensuing 32-month period. There was a nonsignificant 16.3% increase in monthly yield of CT pulmonary angiography or percentage of CT pulmonary angiographic examinations positive for acute PE after CDS (P = .65).Implementation of evidence-based CDS for inpatients was associated with a 12.3% immediate and sustained decrease in use of CT pulmonary angiographic examinations in the evaluation of inpatients for acute PE. for this article.

SUBMITTER: Dunne RM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4554207 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of Evidence-based Clinical Decision Support on the Use and Yield of CT Pulmonary Angiographic Imaging in Hospitalized Patients.

Dunne Ruth M RM Ip Ivan K IK Abbett Sarah S Gershanik Esteban F EF Raja Ali S AS Hunsaker Andetta A Khorasani Ramin R

Radiology 20150213 1

<h4>Purpose</h4>To determine the effect of clinical decision support (CDS) on the use and yield of inpatient computed tomographic (CT) pulmonary angiography for acute pulmonary embolism (PE).<h4>Materials and methods</h4>This HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study with waiver of informed consent included all adults admitted to a 793-bed teaching hospital from April 1, 2007, to June 30, 2012. The CDS intervention, implemented after a baseline observation period, informed provi ...[more]

PMID: 25686367

Similar Datasets

Project description:PURPOSE:Precision oncology is hindered by the lack of decision support for determining the functional and therapeutic significance of genomic alterations in tumors and relevant clinically available options. To bridge this knowledge gap, we established a Precision Oncology Decision Support (PODS) team that provides annotations at the alteration-level and subsequently determined if clinical decision-making was influenced. METHODS:Genomic alterations were annotated to determine actionability based on a variant's known or potential functional and/or therapeutic significance. The medical records of a subset of patients annotated in 2015 were manually reviewed to assess trial enrollment. A web-based survey was implemented to capture the reasons why genotype-matched therapies were not pursued. RESULTS:PODS processed 1,669 requests for annotation of 4,084 alterations (2,254 unique) across 49 tumor types for 1,197 patients. 2,444 annotations for 669 patients included an actionable variant call: 32.5% actionable, 9.4% potentially, 29.7% unknown, 28.4% non-actionable. 66% of patients had at least one actionable/potentially actionable alteration. 20.6% (110/535) patients annotated enrolled on a genotype-matched trial. Trial enrolment was significantly higher for patients with actionable/potentially actionable alterations (92/333, 27.6%) than those with unknown (16/136, 11.8%) and non-actionable (2/66, 3%) alterations (p=0.00004). Actionable alterations in PTEN, PIK3CA, and ERBB2 most frequently led to enrollment on genotype-matched trials. Clinicians cited a variety of reasons why patients with actionable alterations did not enroll on trials. CONCLUSION:Over half of alterations annotated were of unknown significance or non-actionable. Physicians were more likely to enroll a patient on a genotype-matched trial when an annotation supported actionability. Future studies are needed to demonstrate the impact of decision support on trial enrollment and oncologic outcomes.

Project description:PurposeDetermination and development of an effective set of models leveraging Artificial Intelligence techniques to generate a system able to support clinical practitioners working with COVID-19 patients. It involves a pipeline including classification, lung and lesion segmentation, as well as lesion quantification of axial lung CT studies.ApproachA deep neural network architecture based on DenseNet is introduced for the classification of weakly-labeled, variable-sized (and possibly sparse) axial lung CT scans. The models are trained and tested on aggregated, publicly available data sets with over 10 categories. To further assess the models, a data set was collected from multiple medical institutions in Colombia, which includes healthy, COVID-19 and patients with other diseases. It is composed of 1,322 CT studies from a diverse set of CT machines and institutions that make over 550,000 slices. Each CT study was labeled based on a clinical test, and no per-slice annotation took place. This enabled a classification into Normal vs. Abnormal patients, and for those that were considered abnormal, an extra classification step into Abnormal (other diseases) vs. COVID-19. Additionally, the pipeline features a methodology to segment and quantify lesions of COVID-19 patients on the complete CT study, enabling easier localization and progress tracking. Moreover, multiple ablation studies were performed to appropriately assess the elements composing the classification pipeline.ResultsThe best performing lung CT study classification models achieved 0.83 accuracy, 0.79 sensitivity, 0.87 specificity, 0.82 F1 score and 0.85 precision for the Normal vs. Abnormal task. For the Abnormal vs COVID-19 task, the model obtained 0.86 accuracy, 0.81 sensitivity, 0.91 specificity, 0.84 F1 score and 0.88 precision. The ablation studies showed that using the complete CT study in the pipeline resulted in greater classification performance, restating that relevant COVID-19 patterns cannot be ignored towards the top and bottom of the lung volume.DiscussionThe lung CT classification architecture introduced has shown that it can handle weakly-labeled, variable-sized and possibly sparse axial lung studies, reducing the need for expert annotations at a per-slice level.ConclusionsThis work presents a working methodology that can guide the development of decision support systems for clinical reasoning in future interventionist or prospective studies.

Project description:BackgroundPublic health professionals are increasingly expected to engage in evidence-informed decision making to inform practice and policy decisions. Evidence-informed decision making involves the use of research evidence along with expertise, existing public health resources, knowledge about community health issues, the local context and community, and the political climate. The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools has identified a seven step process for evidence-informed decision making. Tools have been developed to support public health professionals as they work through each of these steps. This paper provides an overview of tools used in three Canadian public health departments involved in a study to develop capacity for evidence-informed decision making.MethodsAs part of a knowledge translation and exchange intervention, a Knowledge Broker worked with public health professionals to identify and apply tools for use with each of the steps of evidence-informed decision making. The Knowledge Broker maintained a reflective journal and interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of decision makers and public health professionals. This paper presents qualitative analysis of the perceived usefulness and usability of the tools.ResultsTools were used in the health departments to assist in: question identification and clarification; searching for the best available research evidence; assessing the research evidence for quality through critical appraisal; deciphering the 'actionable message(s)' from the research evidence; tailoring messages to the local context to ensure their relevance and suitability; deciding whether and planning how to implement research evidence in the local context; and evaluating the effectiveness of implementation efforts. Decision makers provided descriptions of how the tools were used within the health departments and made suggestions for improvement. Overall, the tools were perceived as valuable for advancing and sustaining evidence-informed decision making.ConclusionTools are available to support the process of evidence-informed decision making among public health professionals. The usability and usefulness of these tools for advancing and sustaining evidence-informed decision making are discussed, including recommendations for the tools' application in other public health settings beyond this study. Knowledge and awareness of these tools may assist other health professionals in their efforts to implement evidence-informed practice.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The number of trained specialists world-wide is insufficient to serve all children with pediatric rheumatologic disorders, even in the countries with robust medical resources. We evaluated the potential of diagnostic decision support software (DDSS) to alleviate this shortage by assessing the ability of such software to improve the diagnostic accuracy of non-specialists. METHODS:Using vignettes of actual clinical cases, clinician testers generated a differential diagnosis before and after using diagnostic decision support software. The evaluation used the SimulConsult® DDSS tool, based on Bayesian pattern matching with temporal onset of each finding in each disease. The tool covered 5405 diseases (averaging 22 findings per disease). Rheumatology content in the database was developed using both primary references and textbooks. The frequency, timing, age of onset and age of disappearance of findings, as well as their incidence, treatability, and heritability were taken into account in order to guide diagnostic decision making. These capabilities allowed key information such as pertinent negatives and evolution over time to be used in the computations. Efficacy was measured by comparing whether the correct condition was included in the differential diagnosis generated by clinicians before using the software ("unaided"), versus after use of the DDSS ("aided"). RESULTS:The 26 clinicians demonstrated a significant reduction in diagnostic errors following introduction of the software, from 28% errors while unaided to 15% using decision support (p?<?0.0001). Improvement was greatest for emergency medicine physicians (p?=?0.013) and clinicians in practice for less than 10 years (p?=?0.012). This error reduction occurred despite the fact that testers employed an "open book" approach to generate their initial lists of potential diagnoses, spending an average of 8.6 min using printed and electronic sources of medical information before using the diagnostic software. CONCLUSIONS:These findings suggest that decision support can reduce diagnostic errors and improve use of relevant information by generalists. Such assistance could potentially help relieve the shortage of experts in pediatric rheumatology and similarly underserved specialties by improving generalists' ability to evaluate and diagnose patients presenting with musculoskeletal complaints. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02205086.

Dataset Information

Effect of Evidence-based Clinical Decision Support on the Use and Yield of CT Pulmonary Angiographic Imaging in Hospitalized Patients.

Publications

Effect of Evidence-based Clinical Decision Support on the Use and Yield of CT Pulmonary Angiographic Imaging in Hospitalized Patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets