Acceptability of the Predicting Abusive Head Trauma (PredAHT) clinical prediction tool: A qualitative study with child protection professionals

Trust and acceptability of data-driven clinical recommendations in everyday practice: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Increasing attention is being given to the analysis of large health datasets to derive new clinical decision support systems (CDSS). However, few data-driven CDSS are being adopted into clinical practice. Trust in these tools is believed to be fundamental for acceptance and uptake but to date little attention has been given to defining or evaluating trust in clinical settings.

OBJECTIVES

A scoping review was conducted to explore how and where acceptability and trustworthiness of data-driven CDSS have been assessed from the health professional's perspective.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Scopus, ACM Digital, IEEE Xplore and Google Scholar were searched in March 2022 using terms expanded from: "data-driven" AND "clinical decision support" AND "acceptability". Included studies focused on healthcare practitioner-facing data-driven CDSS, relating directly to clinical care. They included trust or a proxy as an outcome, or in the discussion. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) is followed in the reporting of this review.

RESULTS

3291 papers were screened, with 85 primary research studies eligible for inclusion. Studies covered a diverse range of clinical specialisms and intended contexts, but hypothetical systems (24) outnumbered those in clinical use (18). Twenty-five studies measured trust, via a wide variety of quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods. A further 24 discussed themes of trust without it being explicitly evaluated, and from these, themes of transparency, explainability, and supporting evidence were identified as factors influencing healthcare practitioner trust in data-driven CDSS.

CONCLUSION

There is a growing body of research on data-driven CDSS, but few studies have explored stakeholder perceptions in depth, with limited focused research on trustworthiness. Further research on healthcare practitioner acceptance, including requirements for transparency and explainability, should inform clinical implementation.

Which elements of hospital-based clinical decision support tools for the assessment and management of children with head injury can be adapted for use by paramedics in prehospital care? A systematic mapping review and narrative synthesis

OBJECTIVE

Hospital-based clinical decision tools support clinician decision-making when a child presents to the emergency department with a head injury, particularly regarding CT scanning. However, there is no decision tool to support prehospital clinicians in deciding which head-injured children can safely remain at scene. This study aims to identify clinical decision tools, or constituent elements, which may be adapted for use in prehospital care.

DESIGN

Systematic mapping review and narrative synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

Searches were conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and AMED.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods or systematic review research that included a clinical decision support tool for assessing and managing children with head injury.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We systematically identified all in-hospital clinical decision support tools and extracted from these the clinical criteria used in decision-making. We complemented this with a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Following de-duplication, 887 articles were identified. After screening titles and abstracts, 710 articles were excluded, leaving 177 full-text articles. Of these, 95 were excluded, yielding 82 studies. A further 14 studies were identified in the literature after cross-checking, totalling 96 analysed studies. 25 relevant in-hospital clinical decision tools were identified, encompassing 67 different clinical criteria, which were grouped into 18 categories.

CONCLUSION

Factors that should be considered for use in a clinical decision tool designed to support paramedics in the assessment and management of children with head injury are: signs of skull fracture; a large, boggy or non-frontal scalp haematoma neurological deficit; Glasgow Coma Score less than 15; prolonged or worsening headache; prolonged loss of consciousness; post-traumatic seizure; amnesia in older children; non-accidental injury; drug or alcohol use; and less than 1 year old. Clinical criteria that require further investigation include mechanism of injury, clotting impairment/anticoagulation, vertigo, length of time of unconsciousness and number of vomits.

Advances and Future Directions of Diagnosis and Management of Pediatric Abusive Head Trauma: A Review of the Literature

Abusive head trauma (AHT) is broadly defined as injury of the skull and intracranial contents as a result of perpetrator-inflicted force and represents a persistent and significant disease burden in children under the age of 4 years. When compared to age-matched controls with typically single occurrence accidental traumatic brain injury (TBI), mortality after AHT is disproportionately high and likely attributable to key differences between injury phenotypes. This article aims to review the epidemiology of AHT, summarize the current state of AHT diagnosis, treatment, and prevention as well as areas for future directions of study. Despite neuroimaging advances and an evolved understanding of AHT, early identification remains a challenge for contemporary clinicians. As such, the reported incidence of 10–30 per 100,000 infants per year may be a considerable underestimate that has not significantly decreased over the past several decades despite social campaigns for public education such as “Never Shake a Baby.” This may reflect caregivers in crisis for whom education is not sufficient without support and intervention, or dangerous environments in which other family members are at risk in addition to the child. Acute management specific to AHT has not advanced beyond usual supportive care for childhood TBI, and prevention and early recognition remain crucial. Moreover, AHT is frequently excluded from studies of childhood TBI, which limits the precise translation of important brain injury research to this population. Repeated injury, antecedent abuse or neglect, delayed medical attention, and high rates of apnea and seizures on presentation are important variables to be considered. More research, including AHT inclusion in childhood TBI studies with comparisons to age-matched controls, and translational models with clinical fidelity are needed to better elucidate the pathophysiology of AHT and inform both clinical care and the development of targeted therapies. Clinical prediction rules, biomarkers, and imaging modalities hold promise, though these have largely been developed and validated in patients after clinically evident AHT has already occurred. Nevertheless, recognition of warning signs and intervention before irreversible harm occurs remains the current best strategy for medical professionals to protect vulnerable infants and toddlers.

Validation of the PredAHT-2 prediction tool for abusive head trauma

OBJECTIVE

The validated Predicting Abusive Head Trauma (PredAHT) clinical prediction tool calculates the probability of abusive head trauma (AHT) in children <3 years of age who have sustained intracranial injuries (ICIs) identified on neuroimaging, based on combinations of six clinical features: head/neck bruising, seizures, apnoea, rib fracture, long bone fracture and retinal haemorrhages. PredAHT version 2 enables a probability calculation when information regarding any of the six features is absent. We aimed to externally validate PredAHT-2 in an Australian/New Zealand population.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of a prospective multicentre study of paediatric head injuries conducted between April 2011 and November 2014. We extracted data on patients with possible AHT at five tertiary paediatric centres and included all children <3 years of age admitted to hospital who had sustained ICI identified on neuroimaging. We assigned cases as positive for AHT, negative for AHT or having indeterminate outcome following multidisciplinary review. The estimated probability of AHT for each case was calculated using PredAHT-2, blinded to outcome. Tool performance measures were calculated, with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Of 87 ICI cases, 27 (31%) were positive for AHT; 45 (52%) were negative for AHT and 15 (17%) had indeterminate outcome. Using a probability cut-off of 50%, excluding indeterminate cases, PredAHT-2 had a sensitivity of 74% (95% CI 54% t o89%) and a specificity of 87% (95% CI 73% to 95%) for AHT. Positive predictive value was 77% (95% CI 56% to 91%), negative predictive value was 85% (95% CI 71% to 94%) and the area under the curve was 0.80 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.92).

CONCLUSION

PredAHT-2 demonstrated reasonably high point sensitivity and specificity when externally validated in an Australian/New Zealand population. Performance was similar to that in the original validation study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12614000463673.

Methodological standards for the development and evaluation of clinical prediction rules: a review of the literature

Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) that predict the absolute risk of a clinical condition or future outcome for individual patients are abundant in the medical literature; however, systematic reviews have demonstrated shortcomings in the methodological quality and reporting of prediction studies. To maximise the potential and clinical usefulness of CPRs, they must be rigorously developed and validated, and their impact on clinical practice and patient outcomes must be evaluated. This review aims to present a comprehensive overview of the stages involved in the development, validation and evaluation of CPRs, and to describe in detail the methodological standards required at each stage, illustrated with examples where appropriate. Important features of the study design, statistical analysis, modelling strategy, data collection, performance assessment, CPR presentation and reporting are discussed, in addition to other, often overlooked aspects such as the acceptability, cost-effectiveness and longer-term implementation of CPRs, and their comparison with clinical judgement. Although the development and evaluation of a robust, clinically useful CPR is anything but straightforward, adherence to the plethora of methodological standards, recommendations and frameworks at each stage will assist in the development of a rigorous CPR that has the potential to contribute usefully to clinical practice and decision-making and have a positive impact on patient care.

Potential impact of the validated Predicting Abusive Head Trauma (PredAHT) clinical prediction tool: A clinical vignette study

BACKGROUND

The validated Predicting Abusive Head Trauma (PredAHT) tool estimates the probability of abusive head trauma (AHT) in children <3 years old with intracranial injury.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the impact of PredAHT on clinicians' AHT probability estimates and child protection (CP) actions, and assess inter-rater agreement between their estimates and between their CP actions, before and after PredAHT.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

Twenty-nine clinicians from different specialties, at teaching and community hospitals.

METHODS

Clinicians estimated the probability of AHT and indicated their CP actions in six clinical vignettes. One vignette described a child with AHT, another described a child with non-AHT, and four represented "gray" cases, where the diagnosis was uncertain. Clinicians calculated the PredAHT score, and reported whether this altered their estimate/actions. The 'think-aloud' method was used to capture the reasoning behind their responses. Analysis included linear modelling, linear mixed-effects modelling, chi-square tests, Fisher's exact tests, intraclass correlation, Gwet's AC₁ coefficient and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, PredAHT significantly influenced clinicians' probability estimates in all vignettes (p < 0.001), although the impact on individual clinicians varied. However, the influence of PredAHT on clinicians' CP actions was limited; after using PredAHT, 9/29 clinicians changed their CP actions in only 11/174 instances. Clinicians' AHT probability estimates and CP actions varied somewhat both before and after PredAHT. Qualitative data suggested that PredAHT may increase clinicians' confidence in their decisions when considered alongside other associated clinical, historical and social factors.

CONCLUSIONS

PredAHT significantly influenced clinicians' AHT probability estimates, but had minimal impact on their CP actions.

Factors influencing child protection professionals' decision-making and multidisciplinary collaboration in suspected abusive head trauma cases: A qualitative study

Clinicians face unique challenges when assessing suspected child abuse cases. The majority of the literature exploring diagnostic decision-making in this field is anecdotal or survey-based and there is a lack of studies exploring decision-making around suspected abusive head trauma (AHT). We aimed to determine factors influencing decision-making and multidisciplinary collaboration in suspected AHT cases, amongst 56 child protection professionals. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians (25), child protection social workers (10), legal practitioners (9, including 4 judges), police officers (8), and pathologists (4), purposively sampled across southwest United Kingdom. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and imported into NVivo for thematic analysis (38% double-coded). We identified six themes influencing decision-making: 'professional', 'medical', 'circumstantial', 'family', 'psychological' and 'legal' factors. Participants diagnose AHT based on clinical features, the history, and the social history, after excluding potential differential diagnoses. Participants find these cases emotionally challenging but are aware of potential biases in their evaluations and strive to overcome these. Barriers to decision-making include lack of experience, uncertainty, the impact on the family, the pressure of making the correct diagnosis, and disagreements between professionals. Legal barriers include alternative theories of causation proposed in court. Facilitators include support from colleagues and knowledge of the evidence-base. Participants' experiences with multidisciplinary collaboration are generally positive, however child protection social workers and police officers are heavily reliant on clinicians to guide their decision-making, suggesting the need for training on the medical aspects of physical abuse for these professionals and multidisciplinary training that provides knowledge about the roles of each agency.