Literature DB >> 33517452

Predicting pressure injury using nursing assessment phenotypes and machine learning methods.

Wenyu Song1,2, Min-Jeoung Kang1,2, Linying Zhang3, Wonkyung Jung4, Jiyoun Song5, David W Bates1,2,6, Patricia C Dykes1,2,6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Pressure injuries are common and serious complications for hospitalized patients. The pressure injury rate is an important patient safety metric and an indicator of the quality of nursing care. Timely and accurate prediction of pressure injury risk can significantly facilitate early prevention and treatment and avoid adverse outcomes. While many pressure injury risk assessment tools exist, most were developed before there was access to large clinical datasets and advanced statistical methods, limiting their accuracy. In this paper, we describe the development of machine learning-based predictive models, using phenotypes derived from nurse-entered direct patient assessment data.
METHODS: We utilized rich electronic health record data, including full assessment records entered by nurses, from 5 different hospitals affiliated with a large integrated healthcare organization to develop machine learning-based prediction models for pressure injury. Five-fold cross-validation was conducted to evaluate model performance.
RESULTS: Two pressure injury phenotypes were defined for model development: nonhospital acquired pressure injury (N = 4398) and hospital acquired pressure injury (N = 1767), representing 2 distinct clinical scenarios. A total of 28 clinical features were extracted and multiple machine learning predictive models were developed for both pressure injury phenotypes. The random forest model performed best and achieved an AUC of 0.92 and 0.94 in 2 test sets, respectively. The Glasgow coma scale, a nurse-entered level of consciousness measurement, was the most important feature for both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This model accurately predicts pressure injury development and, if validated externally, may be helpful in widespread pressure injury prevention.
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  artificial intelligence; clinical phenotype; electronic health record; patient safety; quality of care

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33517452      PMCID: PMC7973453          DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa336

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc        ISSN: 1067-5027            Impact factor:   4.497


  23 in total

1.  Reduction of Hospital-acquired Pressure Injuries Using a Multidisciplinary Team Approach: A Descriptive Study.

Authors:  Megan W Miller; Rebecca T Emeny; Gary L Freed
Journal:  Wounds       Date:  2019-02-14       Impact factor: 1.546

2.  Evaluating the development and validation of empirically-derived prognostic models for pressure ulcer risk assessment: A systematic review.

Authors:  Chunhu Shi; Jo C Dumville; Nicky Cullum
Journal:  Int J Nurs Stud       Date:  2018-08-15       Impact factor: 5.837

3.  The Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Sore Risk.

Authors:  N Bergstrom; B J Braden; A Laguzza; V Holman
Journal:  Nurs Res       Date:  1987 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.381

4.  The national cost of hospital-acquired pressure injuries in the United States.

Authors:  William V Padula; Benjo A Delarmente
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 3.315

5.  Patient safety: a call to action: a consensus statement from the National Quality Forum.

Authors:  K W Kizer
Journal:  MedGenMed       Date:  2001-03-21

6.  Pressure Ulcers in the United States' Inpatient Population From 2008 to 2012: Results of a Retrospective Nationwide Study.

Authors:  Karen Bauer; Kathryn Rock; Munier Nazzal; Olivia Jones; Weikai Qu
Journal:  Ostomy Wound Manage       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 2.629

Review 7.  Preventing in-facility pressure ulcers as a patient safety strategy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Nancy Sullivan; Karen M Schoelles
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Predictive validity of the Braden scale for patients in intensive care units.

Authors:  Sookyung Hyun; Brenda Vermillion; Cheryl Newton; Monica Fall; Xiaobai Li; Pacharmon Kaewprag; Susan Moffatt-Bruce; Elizabeth R Lenz
Journal:  Am J Crit Care       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 2.228

Review 9.  Patient risk factors for pressure ulcer development: systematic review.

Authors:  Susanne Coleman; Claudia Gorecki; E Andrea Nelson; S José Closs; Tom Defloor; Ruud Halfens; Amanda Farrin; Julia Brown; Lisette Schoonhoven; Jane Nixon
Journal:  Int J Nurs Stud       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 5.837

10.  A wearable wound moisture sensor as an indicator for wound dressing change: an observational study of wound moisture and status.

Authors:  Stephen D Milne; Ihab Seoudi; Hanadi Al Hamad; Talal K Talal; Anzila A Anoop; Niloofar Allahverdi; Zain Zakaria; Robert Menzies; Patricia Connolly
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 3.315

View more
  1 in total

1.  Explainable Artificial Intelligence for Predicting Hospital-Acquired Pressure Injuries in COVID-19-Positive Critical Care Patients.

Authors:  Jenny Alderden; Susan M Kennerly; Andrew Wilson; Jonathan Dimas; Casey McFarland; David Y Yap; Lucy Zhao; Tracey L Yap
Journal:  Comput Inform Nurs       Date:  2022-10-01       Impact factor: 2.146

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.