Clinical Decision Support Opportunities among Clinicians Caring for People Receiving Invasive Mechanical Ventilation: A Cross-sectional Survey
Weissman, G. E.; Bishop, N. S.; Schmid, B. E.; Madden, V.; Pirracchio, R.; Jentzer, J. C.; Riman, K. A.; Krutsigner, D. C.; DiGiovine, B.; Ungar, L. H.; Halpern, S. D.; Auriemma, C. L.; Valley, T. S.; Kerlin, M. P.
Show abstract
Treatment decisions for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) are complex and depend simultaneously on the current ventilator settings, the function of multiple interrelated organ systems, and other treatments. An artificial intelligence (AI)-based clinical decision support system (CDSS) offers a promising approach to alleviate uncertainty in this complex management and provide personalized treatment recommendations. However, little is known about clinician preferences for which treatment decisions clinicians think would most benefit from a CDSS. Therefore, we conducted a cross-sectional electronic survey of practicing physicians, nurses, advanced practice providers, and respiratory therapists to identify key treatment decisions in IMV care. We sent the survey instrument to 132 clinicians across six geographically diverse health systems. Among 51 respondents (39% response rate), there were 24 (47%) physicians, 7 (14%) registered nurses, 8 (16%) advanced practice providers, and 12 (24%) respiratory therapists. Participants were from five US states including Pennsylvania, California, Michigan, Minnesota, and Nebraska. At least 50% of participants identified 18 distinct treatment decisions for IMV care as very important or absolutely essential, including many that were outside of the ventilator settings themselves. The highest agreement about importance was for the decision to extubate (N=51, 100%), and the decisions to conduct a spontaneous awakening trial (N=48, 94%) and spontaneous breathing trial (N=48, 94%). The highest agreement about a decision being not important or only slightly important was for the shape of the inspiratory flow pattern (N=15, 29%). These findings underscore the scope and complexity of clinical decision making across multidisciplinary teams in caring for people receiving IMV. Furthermore, they underscore the gap between important clinician-identified decisions and existing IMV CDSSs that provide suggestions for at most 5 ventilator settings without support for other related decisions. Future work is needed to identify which of these decisions might be most appropriate for inclusion in a CDSS to support IMV management.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Effectiveness of a telenursing intervention program in reducing exacerbations in patients with chronic respiratory failure receiving noninvasive positive pressure ventilation: A randomized controlled trial 93%
- Evaluating N95 Respirator Designs: A Mixed-Methods Pilot and Feasibility Study 92%
- A comparison of self-triage tools to nurse driven triage in the emergency department 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- What Do Clinicians Edit in Ambient AI-Drafted Clinical Documentation? A Qualitative Content Analysis 91%
- Validation of a Derived International Patient Severity Algorithm to Support COVID-19 Analytics from Electronic Health Record Data 90%
- Observer: Creation of a Novel Multimodal Dataset for Outpatient Care Research 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- COVID-19 Advanced Respiratory Care Educational Training Program for Healthcare Workers in Lesotho: An Observational Study 94%
- Which factors should be included in triage? An online survey of the attitudes of the UK general public to pandemic triage dilemmas 92%
- Clinical practice competencies for standard critical care nursing: Consensus statement based on a systematic review and Delphi survey 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- An international factorial vignette-based survey of intubation decisions in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure 94%
- A Modified Delphi Consensus-based Comprehensive Checklist and Angoff Standard for Assessment of Competency in Brain Death/Death by Neurologic Criteria Determination 91%
- Prone Positioning in a North American Cohort of Hypoxemic Patients on Mechanical Ventilation 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Image and structured data analysis for prognostication of health outcomes in patients presenting to the Emergency Department during the COVID-19 pandemic 90%
- Machine Learning Directed Interventions Associate with Decreased Hospitalization Rates in Hemodialysis Patients 90%
- Completion of electronic nursing documentation of inpatient admission assessment: insights from Australian metropolitan hospitals 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.