Dataset Information

Provider acceptance of an automated electronic alert for acute kidney injury.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Clinical decision support systems, including electronic alerts, ideally provide immediate and relevant patient-specific information to improve clinical decision-making. Despite the growing capabilities of such alerts in conjunction with an expanding electronic medical record, there is a paucity of information regarding their perceived usefulness. We surveyed healthcare providers' opinions concerning the practicality and efficacy of a specific text-based automated electronic alert for acute kidney injury (AKI) in a single hospital during a randomized trial of AKI alerts.

Methods

Providers who had received at least one electronic AKI alert in the previous 6 months, as part of a separate randomized controlled trial (clinicaltrials.gov #01862419), were asked to complete a survey concerning their opinions about this specific AKI alert system. Individual approval of the alert system was defined by a provider's desire to continue receiving the alert after termination of the trial.

Results

A total of 98 individuals completed the survey, including 62 physicians, 27 pharmacists and 7 non-physician providers. Sixty-nine percent of responders approved the alert, with no significant difference among the various professions (P = 0.28). Alert approval was strongly correlated with the belief that the alerts improved patient care (P < 0.0001), and negatively correlated with the belief that alerts did not provide novel information (P = 0.0001). With each additional 30 days of trial duration, odds of approval decreased by 20% (3-35%) (P = 0.02).

Conclusions

The alert system was generally well received, although approval waned with time. Approval was correlated with the belief that this type of alert improved patient care. These findings suggest that perceived efficacy is critical to the success of future alert trials.

SUBMITTER: Oh J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4957729 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Provider acceptance of an automated electronic alert for acute kidney injury.

Oh Janice J Bia Joshua R JR Ubaid-Ullah Muhamad M Testani Jeffrey M JM Wilson Francis Perry FP

Clinical kidney journal 20160610 4

<h4>Background</h4>Clinical decision support systems, including electronic alerts, ideally provide immediate and relevant patient-specific information to improve clinical decision-making. Despite the growing capabilities of such alerts in conjunction with an expanding electronic medical record, there is a paucity of information regarding their perceived usefulness. We surveyed healthcare providers' opinions concerning the practicality and efficacy of a specific text-based automated electronic al ...[more]

PMID: 27478598

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceDespite the expansion of published electronic alerts for acute kidney injury (AKI), there are still concerns regarding their effect on the clinical outcomes of patients.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of the AKI alert combined with a care bundle on the care and clinical outcomes of patients with hospital-acquired AKI.Design, setting, and participantsThis single-center, double-blind, parallel-group randomized clinical trial was conducted in a tertiary teaching hospital in Nanjing, China, from August 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021. The inclusion criteria were inpatient adults aged 18 years or older with AKI, which was defined using the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes creatinine criteria. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either the alert group or the usual care group, which were stratified by medical vs surgical ward and by intensive care unit (ICU) vs non-ICU setting. Analyses were conducted on the modified intention-to-treat population.InterventionsA programmatic AKI alert system generated randomization automatically and sent messages to the mobile telephones of clinicians (alert group) or did not send messages (usual care group). A care bundle accompanied the AKI alert and consisted of general, nonindividualized, and nonmandatory AKI management measures.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was maximum change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) within 7 days after randomization. Secondary patient-centered outcomes included death, dialysis, AKI progression, and AKI recovery. Care-centered outcomes included diagnostic and therapeutic interventions for AKI.ResultsA total of 2208 patients (median [IQR] age, 65 [54-72] years; 1560 males [70.7%]) were randomized to the alert group (n = 1123) or the usual care group (n = 1085) and analyzed. Within 7 days of randomization, median (IQR) maximum absolute changes in eGFR were 3.7 (-6.4 to 19.3) mL/min/1.73 m2 in the alert group and 2.9 (-9.2 to 16.9) mL/min/1.73 m2 in the usual care group (P = .24). This result was robust in all subgroups in an exploratory analysis. For care-centered outcomes, patients in the alert group had more intravenous fluids (927 [82.6%] vs 670 [61.8%]; P < .001), less exposure to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (56 [5.0%] vs 119 [11.0%]; P < .001), and more AKI documentation at discharge (560 [49.9%] vs 296 [27.3%]; P < .001) than patients in the usual care group. No differences were observed in patient-centered secondary outcomes between the 2 groups.Conclusions and relevanceResults of this randomized clinical trial showed that the electronic AKI alert did not improve kidney function or other patient-centered outcomes but changed patient care behaviors. The findings warrant the use of a combination of high-quality interventions and AKI alert in future clinical practice.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03736304.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Acute kidney injury often goes unrecognised in its early stages when effective treatment options might be available. We aimed to determine whether an automated electronic alert for acute kidney injury would reduce the severity of such injury and improve clinical outcomes in patients in hospital. METHODS:In this investigator-masked, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial, patients were recruited from the hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, PA, USA. Eligible participants were adults aged 18 years or older who were in hospital with stage 1 or greater acute kidney injury as defined by Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes creatinine-based criteria. Exclusion criteria were initial hospital creatinine 4·0 mg/dL (to convert to ?mol/L, multiply by 88·4) or greater, fewer than two creatinine values measured, inability to determine the covering provider, admission to hospice or the observation unit, previous randomisation, or end-stage renal disease. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequence to receive an acute kidney injury alert (a text-based alert sent to the covering provider and unit pharmacist indicating new acute kidney injury) or usual care, stratified by medical versus surgical admission and intensive care unit versus non-intensive care unit location in blocks of 4-8 participants. The primary outcome was a composite of relative maximum change in creatinine, dialysis, and death at 7 days after randomisation. All analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01862419. FINDINGS:Between Sept 17, 2013, and April 14, 2014, 23,664 patients were screened. 1201 eligible participants were assigned to the acute kidney injury alert group and 1192 were assigned to the usual care group. Composite relative maximum change in creatinine, dialysis, and death at 7 days did not differ between the alert group and the usual care group (p=0·88), or within any of the four randomisation strata (all p>0·05). At 7 days after randomisation, median maximum relative change in creatinine concentrations was 0·0% (IQR 0·0-18·4) in the alert group and 0·6% (0·0-17·5) in the usual care group (p=0·81); 87 (7·2%) patients in the alert group and 70 (5·9%) patients in usual care group had received dialysis (odds ratio 1·25 [95% CI 0·90-1·74]; p=0·18); and 71 (5·9%) patients in the alert group and 61 (5·1%) patients in the usual care group had died (1·16 [0·81-1·68]; p=0·40). INTERPRETATION:An electronic alert system for acute kidney injury did not improve clinical outcomes among patients in hospital. FUNDING:Penn Center for Healthcare Improvement and Patient Safety.

Project description:BackgroundAcute kidney injury (AKI) represents a frequent and grave complication associated with acute pancreatitis (AP), substantially elevating both mortality rates and the financial burden of hospitalization. The aim of our study is to construct a predictive model utilizing automated machine learning (AutoML) algorithms for the early prediction of AKI in patients with AP.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed patients who were diagnosed with AP in our hospital from January 2017 to December 2021. These patients were randomly allocated into a training set and a validation set at a ratio of 7:3. To develop predictive models for each set, we employed the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) algorithm along with AutoML. A nomogram was developed based on multivariate logistic regression analysis outcomes. The model's efficacy was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Additionally, the performance of the model constructed via AutoML was evaluated using decision curve analysis (DCA), feature importance, SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) plots, and locally interpretable model-agnostic explanations (LIME).ResultsThis study incorporated a total of 437 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Out of these, 313 were assigned to the training cohort and 124 to the validation cohort. In the training and validation cohorts, AKI occurred in 68 (21.7%) and 29(23.4%) patients, respectively. Comparative analysis revealed that the AutoML models exhibited enhanced performance over traditional logistic regression (LR). Furthermore, the deep learning (DL) model demonstrated superior predictive accuracy, evidenced by an area under the ROC curve of 0.963 in the training set and 0.830 in the validation set, surpassing other comparative models. The key variables identified as significant in the DL model within the training dataset included creatinine (Cr), urea (Urea), international normalized ratio (INR), etiology, smoking, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), hypertension, prothrombin time (PT), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and diabetes.ConclusionThe AutoML model, utilizing DL algorithm, offers considerable clinical significance in the early detection of AKI among patients with AP.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether electronic health record alerts for acute kidney injury would improve patient outcomes of mortality, dialysis, and progression of acute kidney injury.DesignDouble blinded, multicenter, parallel, randomized controlled trial.SettingSix hospitals (four teaching and two non-teaching) in the Yale New Haven Health System in Connecticut and Rhode Island, US, ranging from small community hospitals to large tertiary care centers.Participants6030 adult inpatients with acute kidney injury, as defined by the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) creatinine criteria.InterventionsAn electronic health record based "pop-up" alert for acute kidney injury with an associated acute kidney injury order set upon provider opening of the patient's medical record.Main outcome measuresA composite of progression of acute kidney injury, receipt of dialysis, or death within 14 days of randomization. Prespecified secondary outcomes included outcomes at each hospital and frequency of various care practices for acute kidney injury.Results6030 patients were randomized over 22 months. The primary outcome occurred in 653 (21.3%) of 3059 patients with an alert and in 622 (20.9%) of 2971 patients receiving usual care (relative risk 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.93 to 1.13, P=0.67). Analysis by each hospital showed worse outcomes in the two non-teaching hospitals (n=765, 13%), where alerts were associated with a higher risk of the primary outcome (relative risk 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 1.98, P=0.006). More deaths occurred at these centers (15.6% in the alert group v 8.6% in the usual care group, P=0.003). Certain acute kidney injury care practices were increased in the alert group but did not appear to mediate these outcomes.ConclusionsAlerts did not reduce the risk of our primary outcome among patients in hospital with acute kidney injury. The heterogeneity of effect across clinical centers should lead to a re-evaluation of existing alerting systems for acute kidney injury.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02753751.

Dataset Information

Provider acceptance of an automated electronic alert for acute kidney injury.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Provider acceptance of an automated electronic alert for acute kidney injury.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets