A hybrid model to support decision making in the stroke clinical pathway

被引:4
作者
Boareto, Pedro Antonio [1 ]
Safanelli, Juliana [2 ]
Liberato, Rafaela B. [2 ]
Moro, Carla H. C. [3 ]
Junior, Jose Eduardo Pecora [4 ]
Moro, Claudia [5 ]
Loures, Eduardo de Freitas Rocha [1 ]
Santos, Eduardo Alves Portela [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Pontif Catholic Univ Parana, Dept Prod & Syst Engn, 1155 Imaculada Conceicao St, BR-80215901 Curitiba, PR, Brazil
[2] Joinville Stroke Registry, Joinville, SC, Brazil
[3] Municipal Hosp Sao Jose, Joinville, SC, Brazil
[4] Fed Univ Curitiba, Dept Appl Social Sci, Curitiba, PR, Brazil
[5] Pontif Catholic Univ Parana, Dept Hlth Technol, Curitiba, PR, Brazil
关键词
Process mining; Discrete Event Simulation; Stroke; Healthcare; Decision making support; PROMETHEE II method; DISCRETE-EVENT SIMULATION; HEALTH-CARE; RESOURCES; FRAMEWORK; EVALUATE; QUALITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.simpat.2022.102602
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
Health processes are highly complex and sensitive, requiring continued improvement. Several methodologies have been developed to support these improvement processes, many of which apply Process Mining (PM) to investigate the current states of processes. Some even use Discrete Event Simulation (DES) techniques to explore alternative scenarios. Among the ones using DES, some rely on Multicriteria Decision-Making Methods (MCDM) to guide them in choosing the best scenario, especially in complex decision-making environments. However, no author presents a single framework combining all three techniques mentioned above, to wit, PM, DES, and MCDM. This paper targets developing this combination and exploring its usefulness in guiding process improvement in the health services area. The clinical path for stroke patients, covering from onset of symptoms to hospital discharge, was used as a test case. The research demonstrated that this proposal provided an innovative diagnostic of the process, identifying the activities that should be improved to obtain the most significant results in the process management indicators. Identifying the activities ensures that the impacts of these improvements are indicated with statistical ac-curacy and eliminating the need to perform on-site testing to test for the best solutions. The research does not address root cause diagnosis of activities to be improved. Therefore, further research needs to be undertaken on an extension of the model to enhance root cause analysis capabilities with a view to validating the framework proposed in other environments and, in this way, assess its replicability.
引用
收藏
页数:27
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Analysis of Clinical Decision Support Systems
    Akturk, Cemal
    ACTA INFORMATICA PRAGENSIA, 2021, 10 (01) : 61 - 74
  • [32] A toolkit to aid clinical decision support
    Burn-Thornton, KE
    Lazzarini, A
    ITAB 2003: 4TH INTERNATIONAL IEEE EMBS SPECIAL TOPIC CONFERENCE ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY APPLICATIONS IN BIOMEDICINE, CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS: NEW SOLUTIONS FOR NEW CHALLENGES, 2003, : 242 - 245
  • [33] Assessment of Shared Decision-making for Stroke Prevention in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation A Randomized Clinical Trial
    Kunneman, Marleen
    Branda, Megan E.
    Hargraves, Ian G.
    Sivly, Angela L.
    Lee, Alexander T.
    Gorr, Haeshik
    Burnett, Bruce
    Suzuki, Takeki
    Jackson, Elizabeth A.
    Hess, Erik
    Linzer, Mark
    Brand-McCarthy, Sarah R.
    Brito, Juan P.
    Noseworthy, Peter A.
    Montori, Victor M.
    JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2020, 180 (09) : 1215 - 1224
  • [34] A hybrid Decision Support System for automating decision making in the event of defects in the era of Zero Defect Manufacturing
    Psarommatis, Foivos
    Kiritsis, Dimitris
    JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL INFORMATION INTEGRATION, 2022, 26
  • [35] Piloting a parent and patient decision aid to support clinical trial decision making in childhood cancer
    Robertson, Eden G.
    Wakefield, Claire E.
    Cohn, Richard J.
    Battisti, Robert A.
    Donoghoe, Mark W.
    Ziegler, David S.
    Fardell, Joanna E.
    Mitchell, Richard
    O'Brien, Tracey A.
    PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY, 2019, 28 (07) : 1520 - 1529
  • [36] Machine learning decision support model for discharge planning in stroke patients
    Cui, Yanli
    Xiang, Lijun
    Zhao, Peng
    Chen, Jian
    Cheng, Lei
    Liao, Lin
    Yan, Mingyu
    Zhang, Xiaomei
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2024, 33 (08) : 3145 - 3160
  • [37] A Model to Support Shared Decision Making in Electronic Health Records Systems
    Lenert, Leslie
    Dunlea, Robert
    Del Fiol, Guilherme
    Hall, Leslie Kelly
    MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2014, 34 (08) : 987 - 995
  • [38] Business intelligence in the healthcare industry: The utilization of a data-driven approach to support clinical decision making
    Basile, Luigi Jesus
    Carbonara, Nunzia
    Pellegrino, Roberta
    Panniello, Umberto
    TECHNOVATION, 2023, 120
  • [39] Dual equipoise shared decision making: definitions for decision and behaviour support interventions
    Elwyn, Glyn
    Frosch, Dominick
    Rollnick, Stephen
    IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2009, 4
  • [40] Developing a Conversation Aid to Support Shared Decision Making: Reflections on Designing Anticoagulation Choice
    Zeballos-Palacios, Claudia L.
    Hargraves, Ian G.
    Noseworthy, Peter A.
    Branda, Megan E.
    Kunneman, Marleen
    Burnett, Bruce
    Gionfriddo, Michael R.
    McLeod, Christopher J.
    Gorr, Haeshik
    Brito, Juan Pablo
    Montori, Victor M.
    Spencer-Bonilla, Gabriela
    Sivly, Angela L.
    Fleming, Kirsten
    Linzer, Mark
    Noseworthy, Peter A.
    Muegge, Jule
    Poplau, Sara
    Simpson, Benjamin
    Vang, Miamoua
    Wambua, Mike
    Anderson, Joel
    Behnken, Emma
    Bellolio, Fernanda
    Cabalka, Renee
    Ferrara, Michael
    Fleming, Kirsten
    Giblon, Rachel
    Inselman, Jonathan
    LeBlanc, Annie
    Olive, Marc
    Thota, Anjali
    Ting, Henry
    Vanmeter, Derek
    Harvey, Lisa
    Keune, Shelly
    Haynes, Brian
    Tomlinson, George
    Daniels, Paul
    Gersh, Bernard
    Hess, Erik
    Jaeger, Thomas
    McBane, Robert
    MAYO CLINIC PROCEEDINGS, 2019, 94 (04) : 686 - 696