Literature DB >> 28888332

Machine-Learning-Based Electronic Triage More Accurately Differentiates Patients With Respect to Clinical Outcomes Compared With the Emergency Severity Index.

Scott Levin1, Matthew Toerper2, Eric Hamrock3, Jeremiah S Hinson4, Sean Barnes5, Heather Gardner4, Andrea Dugas4, Bob Linton4, Tom Kirsch6, Gabor Kelen4.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: Standards for emergency department (ED) triage in the United States rely heavily on subjective assessment and are limited in their ability to risk-stratify patients. This study seeks to evaluate an electronic triage system (e-triage) based on machine learning that predicts likelihood of acute outcomes enabling improved patient differentiation.
METHODS: A multisite, retrospective, cross-sectional study of 172,726 ED visits from urban and community EDs was conducted. E-triage is composed of a random forest model applied to triage data (vital signs, chief complaint, and active medical history) that predicts the need for critical care, an emergency procedure, and inpatient hospitalization in parallel and translates risk to triage level designations. Predicted outcomes and secondary outcomes of elevated troponin and lactate levels were evaluated and compared with the Emergency Severity Index (ESI).
RESULTS: E-triage predictions had an area under the curve ranging from 0.73 to 0.92 and demonstrated equivalent or improved identification of clinical patient outcomes compared with ESI at both EDs. E-triage provided rationale for risk-based differentiation of the more than 65% of ED visits triaged to ESI level 3. Matching the ESI patient distribution for comparisons, e-triage identified more than 10% (14,326 patients) of ESI level 3 patients requiring up triage who had substantially increased risk of critical care or emergency procedure (1.7% ESI level 3 versus 6.2% up triaged) and hospitalization (18.9% versus 45.4%) across EDs.
CONCLUSION: E-triage more accurately classifies ESI level 3 patients and highlights opportunities to use predictive analytics to support triage decisionmaking. Further prospective validation is needed.
Copyright © 2017 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28888332     DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.08.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Emerg Med        ISSN: 0196-0644            Impact factor:   5.721


  58 in total

1.  Clinical Informatics Training During Emergency Medicine Residency: The University of Michigan Experience.

Authors:  Robert W Turer; Miguel Arribas; Sarah M Balgord; Stephanie Brooks; Laura R Hopson; Benjamin S Bassin; Richard Medlin
Journal:  AEM Educ Train       Date:  2020-09-14

2.  Exploring the complex interactions of baseline patient factors to improve nursing triage of acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  Stephanie O Frisch; Julissa Brown; Ziad Faramand; Jennifer Stemler; Ervin Sejdić; Christian Martin-Gill; Clifton Callaway; Susan M Sereika; Salah S Al-Zaiti
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 2.228

3.  Predicting emergency department orders with multilabel machine learning techniques and simulating effects on length of stay.

Authors:  Haley S Hunter-Zinck; Jordan S Peck; Tania D Strout; Stephan A Gaehde
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 4.497

4.  A Gradient Boosting Machine Learning Model for Predicting Early Mortality in the Emergency Department Triage: Devising a Nine-Point Triage Score.

Authors:  Maximiliano Klug; Yiftach Barash; Sigalit Bechler; Yehezkel S Resheff; Talia Tron; Avi Ironi; Shelly Soffer; Eyal Zimlichman; Eyal Klang
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Deep Segmentation Networks for Segmenting Kidneys and Detecting Kidney Stones in Unenhanced Abdominal CT Images.

Authors:  Dan Li; Chuda Xiao; Yang Liu; Zhuo Chen; Haseeb Hassan; Liyilei Su; Jun Liu; Haoyu Li; Weiguo Xie; Wen Zhong; Bingding Huang
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-23

6.  Multisite implementation of a workflow-integrated machine learning system to optimize COVID-19 hospital admission decisions.

Authors:  Jeremiah S Hinson; Eili Klein; Aria Smith; Matthew Toerper; Trushar Dungarani; David Hager; Peter Hill; Gabor Kelen; Joshua D Niforatos; R Scott Stephens; Alexandra T Strauss; Scott Levin
Journal:  NPJ Digit Med       Date:  2022-07-16

7.  "How did you get to this number?" Stakeholder needs for implementing predictive analytics: a pre-implementation qualitative study.

Authors:  Natalie C Benda; Lala Tanmoy Das; Erika L Abramson; Katherine Blackburn; Amy Thoman; Rainu Kaushal; Yongkang Zhang; Jessica S Ancker
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 4.497

8.  Urinary Stone Detection on CT Images Using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks: Evaluation of Model Performance and Generalization.

Authors:  Anushri Parakh; Hyunkwang Lee; Jeong Hyun Lee; Brian H Eisner; Dushyant V Sahani; Synho Do
Journal:  Radiol Artif Intell       Date:  2019-07-24

9.  Clinician involvement in research on machine learning-based predictive clinical decision support for the hospital setting: A scoping review.

Authors:  Jessica M Schwartz; Amanda J Moy; Sarah C Rossetti; Noémie Elhadad; Kenrick D Cato
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 4.497

10.  Random forest machine learning method outperforms prehospital National Early Warning Score for predicting one-day mortality: A retrospective study.

Authors:  Jussi Pirneskoski; Joonas Tamminen; Antti Kallonen; Jouni Nurmi; Markku Kuisma; Klaus T Olkkola; Sanna Hoppu
Journal:  Resusc Plus       Date:  2020-12-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.