Lipika Samal1,2, John D D'Amore3,4, David W Bates1,2,5, Adam Wright1,2. 1. Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Diameter Health Inc, Newton, MA, USA. 4. Boston University, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Partners HealthCare System, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Clinical decision support tools for risk prediction are readily available, but typically require workflow interruptions and manual data entry so are rarely used. Due to new data interoperability standards for electronic health records (EHRs), other options are available. As a clinical case study, we sought to build a scalable, web-based system that would automate calculation of kidney failure risk and display clinical decision support to users in primary care practices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a single-page application, web server, database, and application programming interface to calculate and display kidney failure risk. Data were extracted from the EHR using the Consolidated Clinical Document Architecture interoperability standard for Continuity of Care Documents (CCDs). EHR users were presented with a noninterruptive alert on the patient's summary screen and a hyperlink to details and recommendations provided through a web application. Clinic schedules and CCDs were retrieved using existing application programming interfaces to the EHR, and we provided a clinical decision support hyperlink to the EHR as a service. RESULTS: We debugged a series of terminology and technical issues. The application was validated with data from 255 patients and subsequently deployed to 10 primary care clinics where, over the course of 1 year, 569 533 CCD documents were processed. CONCLUSIONS: We validated the use of interoperable documents and open-source components to develop a low-cost tool for automated clinical decision support. Since Consolidated Clinical Document Architecture-based data extraction extends to any certified EHR, this demonstrates a successful modular approach to clinical decision support.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Clinical decision support tools for risk prediction are readily available, but typically require workflow interruptions and manual data entry so are rarely used. Due to new data interoperability standards for electronic health records (EHRs), other options are available. As a clinical case study, we sought to build a scalable, web-based system that would automate calculation of kidney failure risk and display clinical decision support to users in primary care practices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a single-page application, web server, database, and application programming interface to calculate and display kidney failure risk. Data were extracted from the EHR using the Consolidated Clinical Document Architecture interoperability standard for Continuity of Care Documents (CCDs). EHR users were presented with a noninterruptive alert on the patient's summary screen and a hyperlink to details and recommendations provided through a web application. Clinic schedules and CCDs were retrieved using existing application programming interfaces to the EHR, and we provided a clinical decision support hyperlink to the EHR as a service. RESULTS: We debugged a series of terminology and technical issues. The application was validated with data from 255 patients and subsequently deployed to 10 primary care clinics where, over the course of 1 year, 569 533 CCD documents were processed. CONCLUSIONS: We validated the use of interoperable documents and open-source components to develop a low-cost tool for automated clinical decision support. Since Consolidated Clinical Document Architecture-based data extraction extends to any certified EHR, this demonstrates a successful modular approach to clinical decision support.
Clinical decision support (CDS) “provides clinicians with knowledge and
person-specific information, intelligently filtered and presented at appropriate times, to
enhance the quality and efficiency of health care.” Patient-specific risk predictions are a form of CDS
that improve care by helping physicians to organize and synthesize various clinical data
into a single metric. Many popular
risk-prediction models, such as the Framingham Cardiovascular Risk Score, the
Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Score, and the Gail Breast Cancer Risk Score,
have been made publicly available through websites, spreadsheets, and smartphone apps. These
methods, however, require manual data entry and workflow interruptions. Ambulatory practices
also present many challenges with respect to information technology adoption, including
minimal budget for infrastructure and service. Sixty percent of ambulatory practices have <5 physicians and
limited personnel available to develop CDS not provided by the electronic health record
(EHR).Given the widespread adoption of EHRs, CDS could alternatively leverage structured clinical
data, such as laboratory results, to enable the automation of risk-prediction models.
Automation could increase model use, save clinician time, and reduce data entry errors while
protecting patient privacy. We sought to develop a modular application to extract data,
perform calculations, and display CDS recommendations in a manner that would address
real-world constraints of ambulatory practices. In this study, we developed a stand-alone CDS application for
kidney failure risk prediction as a case study of CDS using Health Level 7 (HL7)
interoperability standards.,
Clinical case study: kidney failure risk prediction
The majority of the 26 million Americans with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are managed in
primary care practices where early recognition of progression to kidney failure could
significantly impact cost, morbidity, and mortality., It is difficult for primary care physicians (PCPs) to recognize
kidney disease progression, since deterioration can be nonlinear and rapid., Therefore, we identified a risk-prediction model
with the hypothesis that risk estimates could greatly enhance PCPs’ ability to
recognize kidney failure progression. After the technology was developed, we sought to
validate the performance of our risk-prediction tool against risk estimates produced by a
tool accompanying the original article.
METHODS
Requirements and technology selection
The development of the application was divided into 3 stages. The first stage was the
development of risk-prediction calculation and a user interface, which was developed in a
single-page application (SPA). The second stage required a server to host the SPA and
provide long-term data storage. The last stage included EHR integration using application
programming interfaces (APIs). (Further details about Stages 1–3 and how we
addressed missing and out-of-range data are provided in Supplementary Appendix S1.)
Stage 1: Single-page application development
We identified an 8-variable risk-prediction model incorporating age, sex, estimated
glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio, serum albumin, serum
bicarbonate, serum calcium, and serum phosphorus to estimate a 5-year risk of progression
to kidney failure. A similar
version of this model has been validated in 31 cohorts internationally. We also calculated estimated eGFR
with the more recently validated Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration
(CKD-EPI) equation rather than relying on older Modification of Diet in Renal Disease
(MDRD) equations reported by our laboratory., The application was designed to diagnose CKD stage according to
guidelines incorporating eGFR and albuminuria. If the risk was >10%, the application
recommended a nephrology referral. If the risk was >1.5% and any laboratory results
were missing, the application recommended orders for any missing laboratory results.We wanted to ensure that the application could be used by PCPs across multiple practices,
operating systems, and devices, so we followed the example set by other projects that have
demonstrated the popularity, scalability, flexibility, and security of web-based
applications. In addition, we
achieved low-cost implementation through the use of open-source libraries.We built upon our prior experience with the HL7 Version 2 Messaging and Clinical Document
Architecture standards. Since
generation of HL7 Consolidated Clinical Document Architecture (C-CDA) documents is a
requirement for certified EHRs, providers incur no incremental cost to export data. The Continuity of Care Documents
(CCDs) that are created according to this standard export structured data, such as
laboratory results, encoded with Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes
(LOINC).Knowing that web browsers would host our user interface, we identified 2 options widely
used in online risk prediction tools: a static HyperText Markup Language (HTML) page,
where the risk calculation is performed by a server-based application (Figure 1 A), and a JavaScript web application,
where the risk is calculated directly in the web browser (Figures 1B and C). This second method uses JavaScript to update
without refreshing the HTML page content so that users can change values in the web
browser and immediately recalculate risk. This approach allowed rapid testing and
prototyping without a hosted environment. We developed a SPA that was able to parse a CCD,
extract the data necessary for the 8-variable model, and return CDS recommendations (Figure 2 ).
Figure 1.
Methods for delivering online clinical decision support.
Figure 2.
Chronic kidney disease risk tool application.
Methods for delivering online clinical decision support.Chronic kidney disease risk tool application.First, we validated the application using CCDs from vendors that were available in a
public repository (https://github.com/chb/sample_ccdas). We established cross-EHR compatibility
by testing fictional samples from multiple EHRs: Allscripts, Cerner, Greenway, Partners
HealthCare, and Vitera. Second, we requested the creation of 5 test patients with
laboratory results indicating various levels of risk from Partners HealthCare. The
demographics and laboratory values were added to these additional test patients in the
same manner as if they were generated for real patients. Then, CCDs were generated for
these test patients in a non-production environment. We then loaded these CCDs into the
SPA and confirmed that the calculated risk was accurate.Third, after receiving approval from the Partners HealthCare Institutional Review Board,
we performed additional testing using documents from a cohort of real patients with stage
3, 4, or 5 CKD assembled for previous studies of CKD care., We manually verified demographic data and serum and urine
laboratory results in the patients’ CCDs by comparing them with data in the EHR. We
then validated our risk estimates using a spreadsheet calculator supplied with the
original article.
Stage 2: Server-based application
The next stage was to develop the server programming to automatically ingest CCDs and
return a prepopulated version of the SPA. To maintain the security and privacy of health
records, the application required the capability of limiting user access and maintaining
an activity log. We selected Node.js as the server platform so that we could reuse
JavaScript code on both the browser and the server with minimal editing. This period spanned from March to
July 2015, during which time the application was again tested for browser
compatibility.
Stage 3: EHR integration via API
The final stage was to set up the services to request CCDs automatically and return a
prepopulated version of the SPA to the EHR via API. Integration with the Partners
HealthCare homegrown EHR (Longitudinal Medical Record) required the use of 3 APIs.Documents were requested using a CCD Data Portability specification, which had been
implemented by Partners to provide 5 years’ worth of prior laboratory data. The
resulting data were parsed, risk was calculated, and the estimate was stored in a MongoDB
database.The final step was to return a CDS message regarding a patient’s risk, which was
shown on the clinical summary tab of Partners’ EHR (Figure 3 ). If users rolled over the blue underlined text, they
would see the longer version of the CDS message (eg, “12% risk of end stage renal
disease in the next 5 years”).
Figure 3.
Clinical decision support link and rollover text on LMR patient summary page.
Clinical decision support link and rollover text on LMR patient summary page.We requested schedules and CCDs for patients before production deployment to ensure that
the application accurately diagnosed patients with stage 3, 4, or 5 CKD. Finally, we
coordinated how long hyperlinks would remain present in the EHR, which was determined to
be 8 days after appointment date. This period spanned August to November 2015.
RESULTS
Single-page application validation results
As described in the Methods section, we performed several validation steps to ensure that
our SPA worked as intended. We processed CCDs for 115 known CKD patients. Several
terminology issues were reconciled. Specifically, certain laboratory tests had multiple
LOINC codes that could be used. For example, we needed to disambiguate the LOINC code for
serum bicarbonate. Though we initially used the LOINC code 1963‐8 (Bicarbonate in
Serum) based on the name “serum bicarbonate” used in the original article
and in common parlance among physicians, we determined that Partners HealthCare actually
reports 2028‐9 (Carbon Dioxide in Serum) as part of the basic metabolic panel. In
addition, we found that not all laboratory results returned numeric results in all
circumstances. For urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio, a normal result would be reported by
the text string “below assay,” which required additional logic for us to
incorporate into risk calculation. We validated the performance of the application
including imputed values (Supplementary
Appendix A1; Table
1).
Server-based application validation results
During end-to-end testing, we tested the application’s performance for an
additional 58 CKD patients in a non-production environment. These patients were selected
from the schedules of the 10 primary care clinics by the application. We validated that
the application performed eGFR and risk estimate calculations correctly. The links to the
EHR were functioning. The clinical recommendations were populating as expected. However,
during the initial service implementation, we had to debug several issues with the
generation and receipt of CCDs. Specifically, using APIs requires precise management of
namespace issues to function reliably. We also discovered that some patients could
generate >1 clinical document if they had multiple appointments, and that new patients
might not have an enterprise master patient index number, so the application would not be
able to request a CCD for them. Steps within the file processing were added to accommodate
these scenarios.The final validation included 82 patients scheduled at 1 primary care clinic, some of
whom did not have CKD. Out of those 82 scheduled patients, our application correctly
diagnosed the 14 patients who had stage 3, 4, or 5 CKD. The application performed eGFR and
risk estimate calculations correctly.This final phase of testing presented several challenges that we addressed before
go-live. This included recognizing that many users would be using Internet Explorer 8.
HTML elements were added to create backwards compatibility before the application would
function with this browser version. Additionally, database indexing was performed based on
query parameters to speed website generation.The system was placed into production utilization in support of a clinical trial on
December 3, 2015. System logs were monitored and no unexpected downtime was experienced.
The system requested and processed 569 533 documents during the period between December 4,
2015, and December 3, 2016. During this time frame, 41 842 (7.3%) of processed CCDs
diagnosed patients with stage 3, 4, or 5 CKD.
DISCUSSION
We developed and implemented an application to automatically calculate 5-year risk of
kidney failure for primary care patients. We determined that it is feasible to use C-CDA
documents in a stand-alone CDS application. Moreover, this application was developed without
a data warehouse and can be adapted to any certified EHR with minor incremental cost. These
advantages are meaningful for cost-conscious ambulatory care providers, such as PCPs, who
desire CDS and analytics functionality beyond what their EHR can provide.We could have created the same tool within an EHR, because many commercial EHRs represent
the data necessary for this risk-prediction model in a structured, coded manner. There are
several advantages of an externally hosted CDS application like this one, such as the
opportunity to deploy a single application across multiple EHRs. Also, knowledge managers
have more flexibility to update recommendations and references within a web-based
application versus a commercial EHR.Previous research has demonstrated that substantial heterogeneity and complexity are
present within C-CDA documents, and observations from this research study related to LOINC
codes substantiate those findings. These issues, however, were surmountable. While we do not expect
that small practices would pursue application development independently, this research
demonstrates that modern development approaches leveraging open-source technology and
interoperability standards can provide a disruptive force to this sector.
LIMITATIONS
While our application delivered a reliable service to diagnose a condition and calculate
risk across 10 primary care practices and thousands of patients, our findings are limited in
several ways. First, our development, design, and findings were specific to CKD. Second, our
asynchronous approach to requesting clinical information the night before a patient visit
may not support scenarios for clinical decision support that require data collection or
immediate clinician response during the office visit. Third, validation of the server-based
application was limited to the Partners HealthCare environment. Lastly, the CKD
risk-prediction model relied primarily on structured data (demographics and lab results).
This risk-prediction model may be less accurate than one that incorporates data that are
only recorded in free-text notes, such as elements of the social history (eg,
“Patient has started smoking again.”). Natural language processing would be
one way to enrich the free-text data so that it can be used for risk prediction.
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS
This research study is the first to establish the feasibility of low-cost stand-alone CDS
using modern web technology and C-CDA documents. Future advances in standards and technology
are likely to further reduce cost and challenges to implementation.Click here for additional data file.
Authors: Ann M O'Hare; Adam Batten; Nilka Ríos Burrows; Meda E Pavkov; Leslie Taylor; Indra Gupta; Jeff Todd-Stenberg; Charles Maynard; Rudolph A Rodriguez; Fliss E M Murtagh; Eric B Larson; Desmond E Williams Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2012-02-04 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Liang Li; Brad C Astor; Julia Lewis; Bo Hu; Lawrence J Appel; Michael S Lipkowitz; Robert D Toto; Xuelei Wang; Jackson T Wright; Tom H Greene Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2012-01-26 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Howard S Goldberg; Marilyn D Paterno; Beatriz H Rocha; Molly Schaeffer; Adam Wright; Jessica L Erickson; Blackford Middleton Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-07-04 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Navdeep Tangri; Morgan E Grams; Andrew S Levey; Josef Coresh; Lawrence J Appel; Brad C Astor; Gabriel Chodick; Allan J Collins; Ognjenka Djurdjev; C Raina Elley; Marie Evans; Amit X Garg; Stein I Hallan; Lesley A Inker; Sadayoshi Ito; Sun Ha Jee; Csaba P Kovesdy; Florian Kronenberg; Hiddo J Lambers Heerspink; Angharad Marks; Girish N Nadkarni; Sankar D Navaneethan; Robert G Nelson; Stephanie Titze; Mark J Sarnak; Benedicte Stengel; Mark Woodward; Kunitoshi Iseki Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-01-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Josef Coresh; Elizabeth Selvin; Lesley A Stevens; Jane Manzi; John W Kusek; Paul Eggers; Frederick Van Lente; Andrew S Levey Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-11-07 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Kenneth D Mandl; Joshua C Mandel; Shawn N Murphy; Elmer Victor Bernstam; Rachel L Ramoni; David A Kreda; J Michael McCoy; Ben Adida; Isaac S Kohane Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2012-03-17 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Lipika Samal; John D D'Amore; Michael P Gannon; John L Kilgallon; Jean-Pierre Charles; Devin M Mann; Lydia C Siegel; Kelly Burdge; Shimon Shaykevich; Stuart Lipsitz; Sushrut S Waikar; David W Bates; Adam Wright Journal: Kidney Med Date: 2022-05-28