Impact of Artificial Intelligence- Assisted Indication Selection on Appropriateness Order Scoring for Imaging Clinical Decision Support

被引:1
|
作者
Shreve, Lauren A. [1 ,9 ]
Fried, Jessica G. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Liu, Fang [5 ]
Cao, Quy [5 ]
Pakpoor, Jina [6 ]
Kahn Jr, Charles E. [5 ,6 ,7 ]
Zafar, Hanna M. [8 ]
机构
[1] Univ Penn, Dept Radiol, Philadelphia, PA USA
[2] Univ Michigan, Dept Radiol, Abdominal Imaging, Ann Arbor, MI USA
[3] Univ Michigan, Dept Radiol, Radiol Informat, Ann Arbor, MI USA
[4] Univ Michigan, Dept Radiol, Tumor Response Assessment Core, Ann Arbor, MI USA
[5] Univ Penn, Dept Biostat Epidemiol & Informat, Philadelphia, PA USA
[6] UCL, Ctr Med Imaging, London, England
[7] Univ Penn, Dept Radiol, Informat, Philadelphia, PA USA
[8] Univ Penn, Dept Radiol, Qual, Philadelphia, PA USA
[9] Hosp Univ Penn, 3400 Spruce St, 1 Silverstein, Suite 130, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
关键词
Imaging clinical decision support; informatics; artificial intelligence; implementation science;
D O I
10.1016/j.jacr.2023.04.016
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess appropriateness scoring and structured order entry after the implementation of an artificial intelligence (AI) tool for analysis of free-text indications. Methods: Advanced outpatient imaging orders in a multicenter health care system were recorded 7 months before (March 1, 2020, to September 21, 2020) and after (October 20, 2020, to May 13, 2021) the implementation of an AI tool targeting free-text indications. Clinical decision support score (not appropriate, may be appropriate, appropriate, or unscored) and indication type (structured, free-text, both, or none) were assessed. The X-2 and multivariate logistic regression adjusting for covariables with bootstrapping were used.Results: In total, 115,079 orders before and 150,950 orders after AI tool deployment were analyzed. The mean patient age was 59.3 +/- 15.5 years, and 146,035 (54.9%) were women; 49.9% of orders were for CT, 38.8% for MR, 5.9% for nuclear medicine, and 5.4% for PET. After deployment, scored orders increased to 52% from 30% (P < .001). Orders with structured indications increased to 67.3% from 34.6% (P < .001). On multivariate analysis, orders were more likely to be scored after tool deployment (odds ratio [OR], 2.7, 95% CI, 2.63-2.78; P < .001). Compared with physicians, orders placed by nonphysician providers were less likely to be scored (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.78-0.83; P < .001). MR (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.82-0.87) and PET (OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.10-0.13) were less likely to be scored than CT (; P < .001). After AI tool deployment, 72,083 orders (47.8%) remained unscored, 45,186 (62.7%) with free-text-only indications. Conclusions: Embedding AI assistance within imaging clinical decision support was associated with increased structured indication orders and independently predicted a higher likelihood of scored orders. However, 48% of orders remained unscored, driven by both provider behavior and infrastructure-related barriers.
引用
收藏
页码:1258 / 1266
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Imaging Appropriateness and Implementation of Clinical Decision Support
    Boland, Giles W.
    Weilburg, Jeffrey
    Duszak, Richard, Jr.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2015, 12 (06) : 601 - 603
  • [2] Clinical Decision Support by Artificial Intelligence
    Zwack, Laura
    Weber, Yvonne
    Sippel, Christoph
    Guenyak, Goekhan
    INTERNIST, 2019, 60 : S9 - S9
  • [3] Artificial Intelligence for Clinical Decision Support
    Zubair, Raheel
    Francisco, Gina
    Rao, Babar
    CUTIS, 2018, 102 (03): : 210 - 211
  • [4] Application Strategies for Artificial Intelligence- based Clinical Decision Support System: From the Simulation to the Real-World
    Park, Sook Hyun
    Cha, Won Chul
    HEALTHCARE INFORMATICS RESEARCH, 2022, 28 (03) : 185 - 187
  • [5] An Artificial Intelligence Tool for Clinical Decision Support and Protocol Selection for Brain MRI
    Wong, K. A.
    Hatef, A.
    Ryu, J. L.
    Nguyen, X., V
    Makary, M. S.
    Prevedello, L. M.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY, 2023, 44 (01) : 11 - 16
  • [6] Artificial Intelligence for Clinical Decision Support in Sepsis
    Wu, Miao
    Du, Xianjin
    Gu, Raymond
    Wei, Jie
    FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE, 2021, 8
  • [7] Clinical Decision Support in the Era of Artificial Intelligence
    Shortliffe, Edward H.
    Sepulveda, Martin J.
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2018, 320 (21): : 2199 - 2200
  • [8] Artificial intelligence for clinical decision support in neurology
    Pedersen, Mangor
    Verspoor, Karin
    Jenkinson, Mark
    Law, Meng
    Abbott, David F.
    Jackson, Graeme D.
    BRAIN COMMUNICATIONS, 2020, 2 (02)
  • [9] Appropriateness and Imaging Utilization: "Computerized Provider Order Entry and Decision Support"
    Thrall, James H.
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2014, 21 (09) : 1083 - 1087
  • [10] CAUSES IN CLINICAL TRIALS FAILURE OF INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE (IBD): AN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE- ASSISTED REVIEW
    Yadete, Tesfaye
    Njoku, Kingsley
    Bettencourt-Silva, Joao
    Liu, Matthew
    Anand, Vibha
    Kartoun, Uri
    Mulligan, Natasha
    Koski, Eileen
    Stappenbeck, Thaddeus S.
    Liu, Julia J.
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2024, 166 (05) : S885 - S885