Machine Learning for Targeted Advance Care Planning in Cancer Patients: A Quality Improvement Study

被引:0
作者
Patel, Mihir N.
Mara, Alexandria
Acker, Yvonne
Gollon, Jamie
Setji, Noppon
Walter, Jonathan
Wolf, Steven
Zafar, S. Yousuf
Balu, Suresh
Gao, Michael
Sendak, Mark
Casarett, David
Leblanc, Thomas W.
Ma, Jessica
机构
[1] Duke Univ, Sch Med, Durham, NC USA
[2] Atrium Hlth Levine Canc Inst, Concord, NC USA
[3] Duke Univ Hlth Syst, Patient Safety & Qual, Durham, NC USA
[4] Duke Univ Hlth Syst, Business Transformat, Durham, NC USA
[5] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Med, Durham, NC USA
[6] Duke Univ, Sch Med, Dept Biostat & Bioinformat, Durham, NC USA
[7] Duke Inst Hlth Innovat, Durham, NC USA
[8] Geriatr Res Educ & Clin Ctr, Durham VA Hlth Syst, Durham, NC USA
关键词
Advance care planning; end-of-life; cancer; machine learning; quality improvement; BARRIERS; HEALTH; DISCUSSIONS; PREDICTIONS; MORTALITY; SURVIVAL; RISK;
D O I
10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2024.08.036
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Context. Prognostication challenges contribute to delays in advance care planning (ACP) for patients with cancer near the end of life (EOL). Objectives. Examine a quality improvement mortality prediction algorithm intervention's impact on ACP documentation and EOL care. Methods. We implemented a validated mortality risk prediction machine learning model for solid malignancy patients admitted from the emergency department (ED) to a dedicated solid malignancy unit at Duke University Hospital. Clinicians received an email when a patient was identified as high-risk. We compared ACP documentation and EOL care outcomes before and after the notification intervention. We excluded patients with intensive care unit (ICU) admission in the first 24 hours. Comparisons involved chi-square/Fisher's exact tests and Wilcoxon rank sum tests; comparisons stratified by physician specialty employ Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel tests. Results. Preintervention and postintervention cohorts comprised 88 and 77 patients, respectively. Most were White, non-Hispanic/Latino, and married. ACP conversations were documented for 2.3% of hospitalizations preintervention vs. 80.5% postintervention (P<0.001), and if the attending physician notified was a palliative care specialist (4.1% vs. 84.6%) or oncologist (0% vs. 76.3%) (P<0.001). There were no differences between groups in length of stay (LOS), hospice referral, code status change, ICU admissions or LOS, 30-day readmissions, 30-day ED visits, and inpatient and 30-day deaths. Conclusion. Identifying patients with cancer and high mortality risk via machine learning elicited a substantial increase in documented ACP conversations but did not impact EOL care. Our intervention showed promise in changing clinician behavior. Further integration of this model in clinical practice is ongoing. J Pain Symptom Manage 2024;68:539-547. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 35 条
  • [1] Big Data In Health Care: Using Analytics To Identify And Manage High-Risk And High-Cost Patients
    Bates, David W.
    Saria, Suchi
    Ohno-Machado, Lucila
    Shah, Anand
    Escobar, Gabriel
    [J]. HEALTH AFFAIRS, 2014, 33 (07) : 1123 - 1131
  • [2] Disparities in Palliative and Hospice Care and Completion of Advance Care Planning and Directives Among Non-Hispanic Blacks: A Scoping Reviews of Recent Literature
    Bazargan, Mohsen
    Bazargan-Hejazi, Shahrzad
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HOSPICE & PALLIATIVE MEDICINE, 2021, 38 (06) : 688 - 718
  • [3] Design of 1-year mortality forecast at hospital admission: A machine learning approach
    Blanes-Selva, Vicent
    Ruiz-Garcia, Vicente
    Tortajada, Salvador
    Benedi, Jose-Miguel
    Valdivieso, Bernardo
    Garcia-Gomez, Juan M.
    [J]. HEALTH INFORMATICS JOURNAL, 2021, 27 (01)
  • [4] Prospective and External Evaluation of a Machine Learning Model to Predict In-Hospital Mortality of Adults at Time of Admission
    Brajer, Nathan
    Cozzi, Brian
    Gao, Michael
    Nichols, Marshall
    Revoir, Mike
    Balu, Suresh
    Futoma, Joseph
    Bae, Jonathan
    Setji, Noppon
    Hernandez, Adrian
    Sendak, Mark
    [J]. JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2020, 3 (02)
  • [5] Casarett D, 2022, NEJM Catalyst, V3
  • [6] Using Design Thinking to Promote Goals of Care Conversations With Seriously Ill Patients
    Casarett, David
    Lakis, Kristen
    Ma, Jessica E.
    Fischer, Jonathan
    Ibrahim, Salam
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PAIN AND SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT, 2023, 66 (02) : 275 - 281
  • [7] The accuracy of clinicians' predictions of survival in advanced cancer: a review
    Cheon, Stephanie
    Agarwal, Arnav
    Popovic, Marko
    Milakovic, Milica
    Lam, Michael
    Fu, Wayne
    DiGiovanni, Julia
    Lam, Henry
    Lechner, Breanne
    Pulenzas, Natalie
    Chow, Ronald
    Chow, Edward
    [J]. ANNALS OF PALLIATIVE MEDICINE, 2016, 5 (01) : 22 - +
  • [8] Advanced Care Planning for Hospitalized Patients Following Clinician Notification of Patient Mortality by a Machine Learning Algorithm
    Chi, Stephen
    Kim, Seunghwan
    Reuter, Matthew
    Ponzillo, Katharine
    Oliver, Debra Parker
    Foraker, Randi
    Heard, Kevin
    Liu, Jingxia
    Pitzer, Kyle
    White, Patrick
    Moore, Nathan
    [J]. JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2023, 6 (04)
  • [9] How accurate are physicians' clinical predictions of survival and the available prognostic tools in estimating survival times in terminally ill cancer patients? A systematic review
    Chow, E
    Harth, T
    Hruby, G
    Finkelstein, J
    Wu, J
    Danjoux, C
    [J]. CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2001, 13 (03) : 209 - 218
  • [10] Extent and determinants of error in doctors' prognoses in terminally ill patients: prospective cohort study
    Christakis, NA
    Lamont, EB
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 320 (7233) : 469 - 472