Predicting Pressure Injury in Critical Care Patients: A Machine-Learning Model.

Am J Crit Care

Jenny Alderden is an assistant professor, School of Nursing, Boise State University, Boise, Idaho, and an adjunct assistant professor, College of Nursing, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. Ginette Alyce Pepper is a professor, and Andrew Wilson is a clinical assistant professor, College of Nursing, University of Utah. Joanne D. Whitney is a professor, College of Nursing, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Stephanie Richardson is a professor, Rocky Mountain University of the Health Professions, Provo, Utah. Ryan Butcher is a senior data architect, Biomedical Informatics Team, Center for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Utah. Yeonjung Jo is a doctoral (PhD) student in population health science, College of Nursing, University of Utah. Mollie Rebecca Cummins is a professor, College of Nursing, University of Utah.

Published: November 2018

Background: Hospital-acquired pressure injuries are a serious problem among critical care patients. Some can be prevented by using measures such as specialty beds, which are not feasible for every patient because of costs. However, decisions about which patient would benefit most from a specialty bed are difficult because results of existing tools to determine risk for pressure injury indicate that most critical care patients are at high risk.

Objective: To develop a model for predicting development of pressure injuries among surgical critical care patients.

Methods: Data from electronic health records were divided into training (67%) and testing (33%) data sets, and a model was developed by using a random forest algorithm via the R package "randomforest."

Results: Among a sample of 6376 patients, hospital-acquired pressure injuries of stage 1 or greater (outcome variable 1) developed in 516 patients (8.1%) and injuries of stage 2 or greater (outcome variable 2) developed in 257 (4.0%). Random forest models were developed to predict stage 1 and greater and stage 2 and greater injuries by using the testing set to evaluate classifier performance. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for both models was 0.79.

Conclusion: This machine-learning approach differs from other available models because it does not require clinicians to input information into a tool (eg, the Braden Scale). Rather, it uses information readily available in electronic health records. Next steps include testing in an independent sample and then calibration to optimize specificity.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6247790PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2018525DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

critical care
16
stage greater
16
care patients
12
pressure injuries
12
pressure injury
8
hospital-acquired pressure
8
electronic health
8
health records
8
random forest
8
injuries stage
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!