Fellow Education Improved Through Mobile Clinical Decision Support Application: A Multi-Center Approach Involving Peri-Procedural Antithrombotic Use

Clinical Decision Support Requirements for Ventricular Tachycardia Diagnosis Within the Frameworks of Knowledge and Practice: Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Ventricular tachycardia (VT) diagnosis is challenging due to the similarity between VT and some forms of supraventricular tachycardia, complexity of clinical manifestations, heterogeneity of underlying diseases, and potential for life-threatening hemodynamic instability. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) have emerged as promising tools to augment the diagnostic capabilities of cardiologists. However, a requirements analysis is acknowledged to be vital for the success of a CDSS, especially for complex clinical tasks such as VT diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to analyze the requirements for a VT diagnosis CDSS within the frameworks of knowledge and practice and to determine the clinical decision support (CDS) needs.

METHODS

Our multidisciplinary team first conducted semistructured interviews with seven cardiologists related to the clinical challenges of VT and expected decision support. A questionnaire was designed by the multidisciplinary team based on the results of interviews. The questionnaire was divided into four sections: demographic information, knowledge assessment, practice assessment, and CDS needs. The practice section consisted of two simulated cases for a total score of 10 marks. Online questionnaires were disseminated to registered cardiologists across China from December 2022 to February 2023. The scores for the practice section were summarized as continuous variables, using the mean, median, and range. The knowledge and CDS needs sections were assessed using a 4-point Likert scale without a neutral option. Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to investigate the relationship between scores and practice years or specialty.

RESULTS

Of the 687 cardiologists who completed the questionnaire, 567 responses were eligible for further analysis. The results of the knowledge assessment showed that 383 cardiologists (68%) lacked knowledge in diagnostic evaluation. The overall average score of the practice assessment was 6.11 (SD 0.55); the etiological diagnosis section had the highest overall scores (mean 6.74, SD 1.75), whereas the diagnostic evaluation section had the lowest scores (mean 5.78, SD 1.19). A majority of cardiologists (344/567, 60.7%) reported the need for a CDSS. There was a significant difference in practice competency scores between general cardiologists and arrhythmia specialists (P=.02).

CONCLUSIONS

There was a notable deficiency in the knowledge and practice of VT among Chinese cardiologists. Specific knowledge and practice support requirements were identified, which provide a foundation for further development and optimization of a CDSS. Moreover, it is important to consider clinicians' specialization levels and years of practice for effective and personalized support.

Development and validation of a web-based electronic application in managing antithrombotic agents in patients undergoing GI endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Antithrombotic therapy among patients undergoing GI procedures is frequently encountered and can impact the procedure and patient outcomes. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines help to manage these medications before endoscopy depending on the patient's clinical status and the type of GI procedure. However, currently there is no readily available electronic tool that can assist in decision-making regarding preprocedural management of these agents. Our aim was to develop an electronic application, endoscopy + aid (ENDOAID), to help manage antithrombotic agents before endoscopy and to perform a validation study to test its accuracy.

METHODS

ENDOAID, a web-based application, was developed using JavaScript software (Oracle Corporation, Redwood Shores, Calif, USA) based on an algorithm to categorize patients and procedures into low and high risk as outlined in the updated ASGE guidelines published in 2016. Once pertinent information regarding a patient's clinical status and the procedure are entered, the application generates recommendations for the management of antithrombotic agents based on their cardiovascular risk and published ASGE guidelines. We performed a validation study with 52 patients who were referred to endoscopy and were taking antithrombotic agents. The patients were divided into groups of 5, and in the simulation each patient had 4 procedures. Different GI procedures were used in the simulation for each group of patients to ensure the entire spectrum of procedures were covered for analysis. Every simulation was then run through ENDOAID. The results from ENDOAID were compared with recommendations based on ASGE guidelines. The latter was derived by consensus between 2 endoscopists (the criterion standard). The personnel using the ENDOAID and those using the ASGE guidelines were different to avoid bias. Any clinical scenario that was unclear or not clearly outlined in ASGE guidelines was discussed with expert endoscopists for a final decision. We evaluated ASGE recommendations and calculated concordance rates between guidelines and ENDOAID results. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was calculated to assess the correlation between ENDOAID results to guidelines.

RESULTS

There was a total of 208 simulated encounters, including 26 procedures. Initial concordance between ENDOAID recommendations and the criterion standard was seen in 206 encounters (99.03%). The 2 encounters that needed further review occurred among patients with Factor V Leiden mutation and deep vein thrombosis from antiphospholipid antibody syndrome and who were undergoing high-risk procedures that had ambiguous guidelines. ENDOAID suggested consultations with an expert before the elective procedure. This suggestion was agreed on by expert endoscopist consensus. Thus, ENDOAID showed a 100% concordance with the ASGE guideline for managing antithrombotics. There was a high degree of correlation (r = .996, P < .01) between ENDOAID results with ASGE.

CONCLUSIONS

We have developed and validated an easy-to-use web-based application that can help in periprocedural management of antithrombotics. Such an application has the potential to simplify the management of these agents and potentially prevent procedural delays, cancellations, or unnecessary consults.