PDF herunterladen
CC BY 4.0 · ACI open 2024; 08(02): e69-e78
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1788652
Research Article

Using Electronic Health Record Mortality Data to Promote Goals-of-Care Discussions in Seriously Ill Transferred Patients: A Pilot Study

Neetu Mahendraker
1   Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
2   Indiana University Health Physicians Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
,
Esmeralda Gutierrez-Asis
1   Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
2   Indiana University Health Physicians Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
,
Seho Park
3   Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
4   Department of Industrial and Data Engineering, Hongik University, Seoul, South Korea
,
Linda S. Williams
3   Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
5   Roudebush VA Medical Center Health Services Research and Development, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
6   Department of Neurology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
,
Titus Schleyer   *
1   Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
3   Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
,
Elizabeth E. Umberfield   *
7   Department of Nursing, Division of Nursing Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States
8   Department of Artificial Intelligence & Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States
› Institutsangaben Funding This work was supported by Regenstrief Institute's Development of Indiana Learning Health Systems Initiative (LHSI) under award number AIM 002, Prop ID: 18-0425-3R. E.E.U. was supported by the National Library of Medicine of the National Institutes of Health under award number T15LM012502. The content of this publication is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of Regenstrief Institute or the National Institutes of Health.
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Background Mortality prediction data may aid in identifying seriously ill transferred patients at high risk of dying and facilitate early goals-of-care discussions (GOCD); however, this is rarely evaluated. We recently developed a model for predicting 30-day inpatient mortality, which may be useful for promoting early GOCD.

Objectives Our objectives were to examine the effects of sharing model-generated mortality risk with hospitalists by assessing (1) if hospitalists agreed with the mortality risk prediction, (2) if they planned to conduct GOCD or consult palliative care within 72 hours of transfer, and (3) if the communication alert affected GOCD timing and other clinical outcomes. We also aimed to measure the association between both the model-generated and hospitalists' stratified risk assessments with patient mortality.

Methods This was a nonrandomized quasi-experimental pilot study with a historical control group. On the second day of hospitalization, the model-generated risk was communicated to the hospitalists. Hospitalists were asked to answer questions via a HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act)-compliant mobile communication system, and clinical outcomes were extracted via chart review.

Results Eighty-four patients (42 in the control and 42 in the intervention group) were included in this study. Hospitalists agreed that all patients in the intervention group were at risk for inpatient mortality. Hospitalists were more likely to indicate a plan to conduct GOCD in the intervention group (n = 9) compared with the control group (n = 4, p < 0.001). In this subset of patients, GOCD was completed within 72 hours in 78% of intervention patients (n = 7) as compared with 50% in the control group (n = 2). The greater absolute value of the model-generated mortality risk was significantly associated with deaths (p = 0.01), similar to the hospitalists' prediction of the mortality risk (p = 0.02).

Conclusion Communicating model-generated mortality risk to hospitalists is a promising approach to promote timely GOCD.

Keywords

goals-of-care discussions - inpatient mortality model - mortality risk stratification - clinical decision support - electronic health records

Protection of Human and Animal Subjects

This study was performed in compliance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki on Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects and was reviewed by the Indiana University Institutional Review Board.


Note

Poster presentation at Society of Hospital Medicine Annual Conference: March 2023.


* Dr. Schleyer and Dr. Umberfield are co-senior authors of this manuscript.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 11. Mai 2023

Angenommen: 01. Mai 2024

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
24. Juli 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Bharadwaj P, Helfen KM, Deleon LJ. et al. Making the case for palliative care at the system level: outcomes data. J Palliat Med 2016; 19 (03) 255-258
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 May P, Normand C, Cassel JB. et al. Economics of palliative care for hospitalized adults with serious illness: a meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med 2018; 178 (06) 820-829
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Beernaert K, Cohen J, Deliens L. et al. Referral to palliative care in COPD and other chronic diseases: a population-based study. Respir Med 2013; 107 (11) 1731-1739
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Brooten JK, Buckenheimer AS, Hallmark JK. et al. Risky behavior: hospital transfers associated with early mortality and rates of goals of care discussions. West J Emerg Med 2020; 21 (04) 935-942
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Rosenberg LB, Jacobsen JC. Chasing hope: when are requests for hospital transfer a place for palliative care integration?. J Hosp Med 2020; 14 (04) 250-251
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Hallen SA, Hootsmans NA, Blaisdell L, Gutheil CM, Han PK. Physicians' perceptions of the value of prognostic models: the benefits and risks of prognostic confidence. Health Expect 2015; 18 (06) 2266-2277
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Moja L, Liberati EG, Galuppo L. et al. Barriers and facilitators to the uptake of computerized clinical decision support systems in specialty hospitals: protocol for a qualitative cross-sectional study. Implement Sci 2014; 9: 105
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Abedini NC, Chopra V. A model to improve hospital-based palliative care: the Palliative Care Redistribution Integrated System Model (PRISM). J Hosp Med 2018; 13 (12) 868-871
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Hui D, Mori M, Meng YC. et al. Automatic referral to standardize palliative care access: an international Delphi survey. Support Care Cancer 2018; 26 (01) 175-180
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Courtright KR, Chivers C, Becker M. et al. Electronic health record mortality prediction model for targeted palliative care among hospitalized medical patients: a pilot quasi-experimental study. J Gen Intern Med 2019; 34 (09) 1841-1847
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Cardona M, Lewis ET, Kristensen MR. et al. Predictive validity of the CriSTAL tool for short-term mortality in older people presenting at emergency departments: a prospective study. Eur Geriatr Med 2018; 9 (06) 891-901
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Van Calster B, Wynants L, Timmerman D, Steyerberg EW, Collins GS. Predictive analytics in health care: how can we know it works?. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2019; 26 (12) 1651-1654
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Dhar V. Big data and predictive analytics in health care. Big Data 2014; 2 (03) 113-116
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Delahanty RJ, Kaufman D, Jones SS. Development and evaluation of an automated machine learning algorithm for in-hospital mortality risk adjustment among critical care patients. Crit Care Med 2018; 46 (06) e481-e488
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Soffer S, Klang E, Barash Y, Grossman E, Zimlichman E. Predicting in-hospital mortality at admission to the medical ward: a big-data machine learning model. Am J Med 2021; 134 (02) 227-234.e4
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Manz CR, Zhang Y, Chen K. et al. Long-term effect of machine learning-triggered behavioral nudges on serious illness conversations and end-of-life outcomes among patients with cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol 2023; 9 (03) 414-418
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Escobar GJ, Gardner MN, Greene JD, Draper D, Kipnis P. Risk-adjusting hospital mortality using a comprehensive electronic record in an integrated health care delivery system. Med Care 2013; 51 (05) 446-453
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Rajkomar A, Oren E, Chen K. et al. Scalable and accurate deep learning with electronic health records. NPJ Digit Med 2018; 1: 18
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Schwartz N, Sakhnini A, Bisharat N. Predictive modeling of inpatient mortality in departments of internal medicine. Intern Emerg Med 2018; 13 (02) 205-211
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 Nakas CT, Schütz N, Werners M, Leichtle AB. Accuracy and calibration of computational approaches for inpatient mortality predictive modeling. PLoS One 2016; 11 (07) e0159046
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 Cohen IG, Amarasingham R, Shah A, Xie B, Lo B. The legal and ethical concerns that arise from using complex predictive analytics in health care. Health Aff (Millwood) 2014; 33 (07) 1139-1147
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 22 Shah ND, Steyerberg EW, Kent DM. Big data and predictive analytics: recalibrating expectations. JAMA 2018; 320 (01) 27-28
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 Beam AL, Kohane IS. Big data and machine learning in health care. JAMA 2018; 319 (13) 1317-1318
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 24 Mahendraker N, Flanagan M, Azar J, Williams LS. Development and validation of a 30-day in-hospital mortality model among seriously ill transferred patients: a retrospective cohort study. J Gen Intern Med 2021; 36 (08) 2244-2250
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 25 Bhaskaran K, Dos-Santos-Silva I, Leon DA, Douglas IJ, Smeeth L. Association of BMI with overall and cause-specific mortality: a population-based cohort study of 3·6 million adults in the UK. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2018; 6 (12) 944-953
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 26 Lupu D, Quigley L, Mehfoud N, Salsberg ES. The growing demand for hospice and palliative medicine physicians: will the supply keep up?. J Pain Symptom Manage 2018; 55 (04) 1216-1223
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 27 Haley EM, Meisel D, Gitelman Y, Dingfield L, Casarett DJ, O'Connor NR. Electronic goals of care alerts: an innovative strategy to promote primary palliative care. J Pain Symptom Manage 2017; 53 (05) 932-937
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 28 Colunga-Lozano LE, Foroutan F, Rayner D. et al. Clinical judgment shows similar and sometimes superior discrimination compared to prognostic clinical prediction models: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 2024; 165: 111200
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 29 Orlovic M, Droney J, Vickerstaff V. et al. Accuracy of clinical predictions of prognosis at the end-of-life: evidence from routinely collected data in urgent care records. BMC Palliat Care 2023; 22 (01) 51
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 30 Richardson S, Dauber-Decker K, Solomon J. et al. Nudging health care providers' adoption of clinical decision support: protocol for the user-centered development of a behavioral economics-inspired electronic health record tool. JMIR Res Protoc 2023; 12: e42653
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 31 Embi PJ. Algorithmovigilance-advancing methods to analyze and monitor artificial intelligence-driven health care for effectiveness and equity. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4 (04) e214622
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 32 Auerbach AD, Pantilat SZ. End-of-life care in a voluntary hospitalist model: effects on communication, processes of care, and patient symptoms. Am J Med 2004; 116 (10) 669-675
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 33 Choi DT, Sada YH, Sansgiry S. et al. Using telemedicine to facilitate patient communication and treatment decision-making following multidisciplinary tumor board review for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. J Gastrointest Cancer 2023; 54 (02) 623-631
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 34 Oliver DP, Demiris G, Wittenberg-Lyles E, Washington K, Day T, Novak H. A systematic review of the evidence base for telehospice. Telemed J E Health 2012; 18 (01) 38-47
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar