Early identification of patients admitted to hospital for covid-19 at risk of clinical deterioration: model development and multisite external validation study

Risk factors for progression to severe infection and prolonged viral clearance time in hospitalized elderly patients infected with the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2: a retrospective study at Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University

Introduction

In elderly patients infected with the Omicron variant, disease progression to severe infection can result in poor outcomes. This study aimed to identify risk and protective factors associated with disease progression to severe infection and viral clearance time in elderly Omicron-infected patients.

Methods

Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, was officially designated to provide treatment to patients with COVID-19. This study was conducted on confirmed Omicron cases admitted to the hospital between 10 April 2022 and 21 June 2022. In total, 1,568 patients aged 65 years or older were included. We conducted a retrospective, observational study using logistic regression to analyze risk and protective factors for the development of severe disease and Cox proportional hazards regression models to analyze factors influencing viral clearance time.

Results

Aged over 80 years, having 2 or more comorbidities, combined cerebrovascular disease, chronic neurological disease, and mental disorders were associated with the development of severe disease, and full vaccination was a protective factor. Furthermore, aged over 80 years, combined chronic respiratory disease, chronic renal disease, cerebrovascular disease, mental disorders, and high viral load were associated with prolonged viral clearance time, and full vaccination was a protective factor.

Discussion

This study analyzed risk factors for progression to severe infection and prolonged viral clearance time in hospitalized elderly Omicron-infected patients. Aged patients with comorbidities had a higher risk of developing severe infection and had longer viral clearance, while vaccination protected them against the Omicron infection.

Use of artificial intelligence in critical care: opportunities and obstacles

BACKGROUND

Perhaps nowhere else in the healthcare system than in the intensive care unit environment are the challenges to create useful models with direct time-critical clinical applications more relevant and the obstacles to achieving those goals more massive. Machine learning-based artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to define states and predict future events are commonplace activities of modern life. However, their penetration into acute care medicine has been slow, stuttering and uneven. Major obstacles to widespread effective application of AI approaches to the real-time care of the critically ill patient exist and need to be addressed.

MAIN BODY

Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) in acute and critical care environments support clinicians, not replace them at the bedside. As will be discussed in this review, the reasons are many and include the immaturity of AI-based systems to have situational awareness, the fundamental bias in many large databases that do not reflect the target population of patient being treated making fairness an important issue to address and technical barriers to the timely access to valid data and its display in a fashion useful for clinical workflow. The inherent "black-box" nature of many predictive algorithms and CDSS makes trustworthiness and acceptance by the medical community difficult. Logistically, collating and curating in real-time multidimensional data streams of various sources needed to inform the algorithms and ultimately display relevant clinical decisions support format that adapt to individual patient responses and signatures represent the efferent limb of these systems and is often ignored during initial validation efforts. Similarly, legal and commercial barriers to the access to many existing clinical databases limit studies to address fairness and generalizability of predictive models and management tools.

CONCLUSIONS

AI-based CDSS are evolving and are here to stay. It is our obligation to be good shepherds of their use and further development.

Machine and deep learning methods for clinical outcome prediction based on physiological data of COVID-19 patients: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous machine and deep learning (MDL) methods have been proposed in the literature to analyze patient physiological data. The objective of this review is to summarize various aspects of these methods and assess their practical utility for predicting various clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library, screened and selected the studies matching the inclusion criteria. The clinical analysis focused on the characteristics of the patient cohorts in the studies included in this review, the specific tasks in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic that machine and deep learning methods were used for, and their practical limitations. The technical analysis focused on the details of specific MDL methods and their performance.

RESULTS

Analysis of the 48 selected studies revealed that the majority (∼54 %) of them examined the application of MDL methods for the prediction of survival/mortality-related patient outcomes, while a smaller fraction (∼13 %) of studies also examined applications to the prediction of patients' physiological outcomes and hospital resource utilization. 21 % of the studies examined the application of MDL methods to multiple clinical tasks. Machine and deep learning methods have been shown to be effective at predicting several outcomes of COVID-19 patients, such as disease severity, complications, intensive care unit (ICU) transfer, and mortality. MDL methods also achieved high accuracy in predicting the required number of ICU beds and ventilators.

CONCLUSION

Machine and deep learning methods have been shown to be valuable tools for predicting disease severity, organ dysfunction and failure, patient outcomes, and hospital resource utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic. The discovered knowledge and our conclusions and recommendations can also be useful to healthcare professionals and artificial intelligence researchers in managing future pandemics.

National Multi-Institutional Validation of a Surgical Transfusion Risk Prediction Model

BACKGROUND

Accurate estimation of surgical transfusion risk is important for many aspects of surgical planning, yet few methods for estimating are available for estimating such risk. There is a need for reliable validated methods for transfusion risk stratification to support effective perioperative planning and resource stewardship.

STUDY DESIGN

This study was conducted using the American College of Surgeons NSQIP datafile from 2019. S-PATH performance was evaluated at each contributing hospital, with and without hospital-specific model tuning. Linear regression was used to assess the relationship between hospital characteristics and area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve.

RESULTS

A total of 1,000,927 surgical cases from 414 hospitals were evaluated. Aggregate AUROC was 0.910 (95% CI 0.904 to 0.916) without model tuning and 0.925 (95% CI 0.919 to 0.931) with model tuning. AUROC varied across individual hospitals (median 0.900, interquartile range 0.849 to 0.944), but no statistically significant relationships were found between hospital-level characteristics studied and model AUROC.

CONCLUSIONS

S-PATH demonstrated excellent discriminative performance, although there was variation across hospitals that was not well-explained by hospital-level characteristics. These results highlight the S-PATH's viability as a generalizable surgical transfusion risk prediction tool.

Development and external validation of a prediction model for the transition from mild to moderate or severe form of COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

COVID-19 pandemic seems to be under control. However, despite the vaccines, 5 to 10% of the patients with mild disease develop moderate to critical forms with potential lethal evolution. In addition to assess lung infection spread, chest CT helps to detect complications. Developing a prediction model to identify at-risk patients of worsening from mild COVID-19 combining simple clinical and biological parameters with qualitative or quantitative data using CT would be relevant to organizing optimal patient management.

METHODS

Four French hospitals were used for model training and internal validation. External validation was conducted in two independent hospitals. We used easy-to-obtain clinical (age, gender, smoking, symptoms' onset, cardiovascular comorbidities, diabetes, chronic respiratory diseases, immunosuppression) and biological parameters (lymphocytes, CRP) with qualitative or quantitative data (including radiomics) from the initial CT in mild COVID-19 patients.

RESULTS

Qualitative CT scan with clinical and biological parameters can predict which patients with an initial mild presentation would develop a moderate to critical form of COVID-19, with a c-index of 0.70 (95% CI 0.63; 0.77). CT scan quantification improved the performance of the prediction up to 0.73 (95% CI 0.67; 0.79) and radiomics up to 0.77 (95% CI 0.71; 0.83). Results were similar in both validation cohorts, considering CT scans with or without injection.

CONCLUSION

Adding CT scan quantification or radiomics to simple clinical and biological parameters can better predict which patients with an initial mild COVID-19 would worsen than qualitative analyses alone. This tool could help to the fair use of healthcare resources and to screen patients for potential new drugs to prevent a pejorative evolution of COVID-19.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04481620.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

CT scan quantification or radiomics analysis is superior to qualitative analysis, when used with simple clinical and biological parameters, to determine which patients with an initial mild presentation of COVID-19 would worsen to a moderate to critical form.

KEY POINTS

• Qualitative CT scan analyses with simple clinical and biological parameters can predict which patients with an initial mild COVID-19 and respiratory symptoms would worsen with a c-index of 0.70. • Adding CT scan quantification improves the performance of the clinical prediction model to an AUC of 0.73. • Radiomics analyses slightly improve the performance of the model to a c-index of 0.77.

Temporal Generalizability of Machine Learning Models for Predicting Postoperative Delirium Using Electronic Health Record Data: Model Development and Validation Study

BACKGROUND

Although machine learning models demonstrate significant potential in predicting postoperative delirium, the advantages of their implementation in real-world settings remain unclear and require a comparison with conventional models in practical applications.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to validate the temporal generalizability of decision tree ensemble and sparse linear regression models for predicting delirium after surgery compared with that of the traditional logistic regression model.

METHODS

The health record data of patients hospitalized at an advanced emergency and critical care medical center in Kumamoto, Japan, were collected electronically. We developed a decision tree ensemble model using extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) and a sparse linear regression model using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression. To evaluate the predictive performance of the model, we used the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) to measure discrimination and the slope and intercept of the regression between predicted and observed probabilities to measure calibration. The Brier score was evaluated as an overall performance metric. We included 11,863 consecutive patients who underwent surgery with general anesthesia between December 2017 and February 2022. The patients were divided into a derivation cohort before the COVID-19 pandemic and a validation cohort during the COVID-19 pandemic. Postoperative delirium was diagnosed according to the confusion assessment method.

RESULTS

A total of 6497 patients (68.5, SD 14.4 years, women n=2627, 40.4%) were included in the derivation cohort, and 5366 patients (67.8, SD 14.6 years, women n=2105, 39.2%) were included in the validation cohort. Regarding discrimination, the XGBoost model (AUROC 0.87-0.90 and MCC 0.34-0.44) did not significantly outperform the LASSO model (AUROC 0.86-0.89 and MCC 0.34-0.41). The logistic regression model (AUROC 0.84-0.88, MCC 0.33-0.40, slope 1.01-1.19, intercept -0.16 to 0.06, and Brier score 0.06-0.07), with 8 predictors (age, intensive care unit, neurosurgery, emergency admission, anesthesia time, BMI, blood loss during surgery, and use of an ambulance) achieved good predictive performance.

CONCLUSIONS

The XGBoost model did not significantly outperform the LASSO model in predicting postoperative delirium. Furthermore, a parsimonious logistic model with a few important predictors achieved comparable performance to machine learning models in predicting postoperative delirium.

Prognostic models in COVID-19 infection that predict severity: a systematic review

Current evidence on COVID-19 prognostic models is inconsistent and clinical applicability remains controversial. We performed a systematic review to summarize and critically appraise the available studies that have developed, assessed and/or validated prognostic models of COVID-19 predicting health outcomes. We searched six bibliographic databases to identify published articles that investigated univariable and multivariable prognostic models predicting adverse outcomes in adult COVID-19 patients, including intensive care unit (ICU) admission, intubation, high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and mortality. We identified and assessed 314 eligible articles from more than 40 countries, with 152 of these studies presenting mortality, 66 progression to severe or critical illness, 35 mortality and ICU admission combined, 17 ICU admission only, while the remaining 44 studies reported prediction models for mechanical ventilation (MV) or a combination of multiple outcomes. The sample size of included studies varied from 11 to 7,704,171 participants, with a mean age ranging from 18 to 93 years. There were 353 prognostic models investigated, with area under the curve (AUC) ranging from 0.44 to 0.99. A great proportion of studies (61.5%, 193 out of 314) performed internal or external validation or replication. In 312 (99.4%) studies, prognostic models were reported to be at high risk of bias due to uncertainties and challenges surrounding methodological rigor, sampling, handling of missing data, failure to deal with overfitting and heterogeneous definitions of COVID-19 and severity outcomes. While several clinical prognostic models for COVID-19 have been described in the literature, they are limited in generalizability and/or applicability due to deficiencies in addressing fundamental statistical and methodological concerns. Future large, multi-centric and well-designed prognostic prospective studies are needed to clarify remaining uncertainties.

The future of automated infection detection: Innovation to transform practice (Part III/III)

Current methods of emergency-room-based syndromic surveillance were insufficient to detect early community spread of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the United States, which slowed the infection prevention and control response to the novel pathogen. Emerging technologies and automated infection surveillance have the potential to improve upon current practice standards and to revolutionize the practice of infection detection, prevention and control both inside and outside of healthcare settings. Genomics, natural language processing, and machine learning can be leveraged to improve identification of transmission events and aid and evaluate outbreak response. In the near future, automated infection detection strategies can be used to advance a true "Learning Healthcare System" that will support near-real-time quality improvement efforts and advance the scientific basis for the practice of infection control.

Cardiovascular and Renal Comorbidities Included into Neural Networks Predict the Outcome in COVID-19 Patients Admitted to an Intensive Care Unit: Three-Center, Cross-Validation, Age- and Sex-Matched Study

Here, we performed a multicenter, age- and sex-matched study to compare the efficiency of various machine learning algorithms in the prediction of COVID-19 fatal outcomes and to develop sensitive, specific, and robust artificial intelligence tools for the prompt triage of patients with severe COVID-19 in the intensive care unit setting. In a challenge against other established machine learning algorithms (decision trees, random forests, extra trees, neural networks, k-nearest neighbors, and gradient boosting: XGBoost, LightGBM, and CatBoost) and multivariate logistic regression as a reference, neural networks demonstrated the highest sensitivity, sufficient specificity, and excellent robustness. Further, neural networks based on coronary artery disease/chronic heart failure, stage 3-5 chronic kidney disease, blood urea nitrogen, and C-reactive protein as the predictors exceeded 90% sensitivity and 80% specificity, reaching AUROC of 0.866 at primary cross-validation and 0.849 at secondary cross-validation on virtual samples generated by the bootstrapping procedure. These results underscore the impact of cardiovascular and renal comorbidities in the context of thrombotic complications characteristic of severe COVID-19. As aforementioned predictors can be obtained from the case histories or are inexpensive to be measured at admission to the intensive care unit, we suggest this predictor composition is useful for the triage of critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Clinician Perspectives on Barriers and Enablers to Implementing an Inpatient Oncology Early Warning System: A Mixed-Methods Study

PURPOSE

To elicit end-user and stakeholder perceptions regarding design and implementation of an inpatient clinical deterioration early warning system (EWS) for oncology patients to better fit routine clinical practices and enhance clinical impact.

METHODS

In an explanatory-sequential mixed-methods study, we evaluated a stakeholder-informed oncology early warning system (OncEWS) using surveys and semistructured interviews. Stakeholders were physicians, advanced practice providers (APPs), and nurses. For qualitative data, we used grounded theory and thematic content analysis via the constant comparative method to identify determinants of OncEWS implementation.

RESULTS

Survey respondents generally agreed that an oncology-focused EWS could add value beyond clinical judgment, with nurses endorsing this notion significantly more strongly than other clinicians (nurse: median 5 on a 6-point scale [6 = strongly agree], interquartile range 4-5; doctors/advanced practice providers: 4 [4-5]; P = .005). However, some respondents would not trust an EWS to identify risk accurately (n = 36 [42%] somewhat or very concerned), while others were concerned that institutional culture would not embrace such an EWS (n = 17 [28%]).Interviews highlighted important aspects of the EWS and the local context that might facilitate implementation, including (1) a model tailored to the subtleties of oncology patients, (2) transparent model information, and (3) nursing-centric workflows. Interviewees raised the importance of sepsis as a common and high-risk deterioration syndrome.

CONCLUSION

Stakeholders prioritized maximizing the degree to which the OncEWS is understandable, informative, actionable, and workflow-complementary, and perceived these factors to be key for translation into clinical benefit.

Predicting oxygen requirements in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 using an artificial intelligence-clinician model based on local non-image data

BACKGROUND

When facing unprecedented emergencies such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a predictive artificial intelligence (AI) model with real-time customized designs can be helpful for clinical decision-making support in constantly changing environments. We created models and compared the performance of AI in collaboration with a clinician and that of AI alone to predict the need for supplemental oxygen based on local, non-image data of patients with COVID-19.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We enrolled 30 patients with COVID-19 who were aged >60 years on admission and not treated with oxygen therapy between December 1, 2020 and January 4, 2021 in this 50-bed, single-center retrospective cohort study. The outcome was requirement for oxygen after admission.

RESULTS

The model performance to predict the need for oxygen by AI in collaboration with a clinician was better than that by AI alone. Sodium chloride difference >33.5 emerged as a novel indicator to predict the need for oxygen in patients with COVID-19. To prevent severe COVID-19 in older patients, dehydration compensation may be considered in pre-hospitalization care.

CONCLUSION

In clinical practice, our approach enables the building of a better predictive model with prompt clinician feedback even in new scenarios. These can be applied not only to current and future pandemic situations but also to other diseases within the healthcare system.

Development and validation of a dynamic 48-hour in-hospital mortality risk stratification for COVID-19 in a UK teaching hospital: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To develop a disease stratification model for COVID-19 that updates according to changes in a patient's condition while in hospital to facilitate patient management and resource allocation.

DESIGN

In this retrospective cohort study, we adopted a landmarking approach to dynamic prediction of all-cause in-hospital mortality over the next 48 hours. We accounted for informative predictor missingness and selected predictors using penalised regression.

SETTING

All data used in this study were obtained from a single UK teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

We developed the model using 473 consecutive patients with COVID-19 presenting to a UK hospital between 1 March 2020 and 12 September 2020; and temporally validated using data on 1119 patients presenting between 13 September 2020 and 17 March 2021.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome is all-cause in-hospital mortality within 48 hours of the prediction time. We accounted for the competing risks of discharge from hospital alive and transfer to a tertiary intensive care unit for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

RESULTS

Our final model includes age, Clinical Frailty Scale score, heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation/fractional inspired oxygen ratio, white cell count, presence of acidosis (pH <7.35) and interleukin-6. Internal validation achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) of 0.90 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.93) and temporal validation gave an AUROC of 0.86 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Our model incorporates both static risk factors (eg, age) and evolving clinical and laboratory data, to provide a dynamic risk prediction model that adapts to both sudden and gradual changes in an individual patient's clinical condition. On successful external validation, the model has the potential to be a powerful clinical risk assessment tool.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered as 'researchregistry5464' on the Research Registry (www.researchregistry.com).

Early Prediction Model for Critical Illness of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients Based on Machine Learning Techniques

Motivation

Patients with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) worsen into critical illness suddenly is a matter of great concern. Early identification and effective triaging of patients with a high risk of developing critical illness COVID-19 upon admission can aid in improving patient care, increasing the cure rate, and mitigating the burden on the medical care system. This study proposed and extended classical least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) logistic regression to objectively identify clinical determination and risk factors for the early identification of patients at high risk of progression to critical illness at the time of hospital admission.

Methods

In this retrospective multicenter study, data of 1,929 patients with COVID-19 were assessed. The association between laboratory characteristics measured at admission and critical illness was screened with logistic regression. LASSO logistic regression was utilized to construct predictive models for estimating the risk that a patient with COVID-19 will develop a critical illness.

Results

The development cohort consisted of 1,363 patients with COVID-19 with 133 (9.7%) patients developing the critical illness. Univariate logistic regression analysis revealed 28 variables were prognosis factors for critical illness COVID-19 (p < 0.05). Elevated CK-MB, neutrophils, PCT, α-HBDH, D-dimer, LDH, glucose, PT, APTT, RDW (SD and CV), fibrinogen, and AST were predictors for the early identification of patients at high risk of progression to critical illness. Lymphopenia, a low rate of basophils, eosinophils, thrombopenia, red blood cell, hematocrit, hemoglobin concentration, blood platelet count, and decreased levels of K, Na, albumin, albumin to globulin ratio, and uric acid were clinical determinations associated with the development of critical illness at the time of hospital admission. The risk score accurately predicted critical illness in the development cohort [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.78-0.86], also in the external validation cohort (n = 566, AUC = 0.84).

Conclusion

A risk prediction model based on laboratory findings of patients with COVID-19 was developed for the early identification of patients at high risk of progression to critical illness. This cohort study identified 28 indicators associated with critical illness of patients with COVID-19. The risk model might contribute to the treatment of critical illness disease as early as possible and allow for optimized use of medical resources.

Exploratory COVID-19 death risk score based on basic laboratory tests and physiological clinical measurements

BACKGROUND

In the event of a sudden shortage of medical resources, a rapid, simple, and accurate prediction model is essential for the 30-day mortality rate of patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

This retrospective study compared the characteristics of the survivals and non-survivals of 278 patients with COVID-19. Logistic regression analysis was performed to obtain the "COVID-19 death risk score" (CDRS) model. Using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve and Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test, discrimination and calibration were assessed. Internal validation was conducted using a regular bootstrap method.

RESULTS

A total of 63 (22.66%) of 278 included patients died. The logistic regression analysis revealed that high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP; odds ratio [OR]=1.018), D-dimer (OR=1.101), and respiratory rate (RR; OR=1.185) were independently associated with 30-day mortality. CDRS was calculated as follows: CDRS=-10.245+(0.022×hsCRP)+(0.172×D-dimer)+(0.203×RR). CDRS had the same predictive effect as the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) and "confusion, uremia, respiratory rate, blood pressure, and age over 65 years" (CURB-65) scores, with AUROCs of 0.984 for CDRS, 0.975 for SOFA, and 0.971 for CURB-65, respectively. And CDRS showed good calibration. The AUROC through internal validations was 0.980 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.965-0.995). Regarding the clinical value, the decision curve analysis of CDRS showed a net value similar to that of CURB-65 in this cohort.

CONCLUSION

CDRS is a novel, efficient and accurate prediction model for the early identification of COVID-19 patients with poor outcomes. Although it is not as advanced as the other models, CDRS had a similar performance to that of SOFA and CURB-65.