Impact of Automated Sepsis Metric Evaluation on Provider Performance
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 状态
- 已完成
- 入组人数
- 66
- 试验地点
- 1
研究概览
简要总结
Sepsis is a life-threatening condition caused by the body's response to infection and is a leading cause of death worldwide. Hospitals use a complex quality measure called SEP-1 to track whether patients with severe sepsis or septic shock receive recommended care, such as timely antibiotics, fluids, and laboratory testing. However, evaluating SEP-1 is difficult. It requires manual review of medical records, is time-consuming and expensive, and typically provides feedback to clinicians months after care is delivered. This delay limits the ability to improve care in real time.
This study tested whether artificial intelligence (AI), specifically a type of system called a large language model (LLM), could improve the quality of sepsis care by providing faster and more detailed feedback to physicians.
The study was conducted at two emergency departments within a large academic health system. Sixty-six attending physicians were randomly assigned to one of two groups. In the intervention group, the AI system reviewed each patient's medical record at the time of hospital discharge and determined whether SEP-1 care standards were met. Physicians then received near real-time, individualized feedback about their performance, including specific areas for improvement. In the control group, physicians received standard feedback based on a small sample of cases reviewed months later using traditional methods.
详细描述
Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and remains a major focus of hospital quality improvement efforts. In the United States, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) is a publicly reported quality measure that evaluates adherence to evidence-based processes of care, including timely antibiotic administration, fluid resuscitation, and laboratory testing. Despite its importance, SEP-1 is widely recognized as a complex measure, consisting of dozens of individual elements that must be completed within specific timeframes. Assessment of compliance typically relies on manual chart abstraction, which is resource-intensive, subject to variability, and performed on a small subset of cases with delays of several months. These limitations reduce the ability of SEP-1 reporting to drive timely improvements in clinical care.
Advances in artificial intelligence (AI), particularly large language models (LLMs), offer an opportunity to automate the extraction and interpretation of clinical information from unstructured medical records. Prior work has demonstrated that LLMs can achieve high agreement with expert reviewers when applied to complex clinical abstraction tasks. Building on this foundation, this study evaluates whether integrating AI-enabled chart abstraction into a real-world clinical workflow can improve performance on a complex quality measure by providing near real-time feedback to clinicians.
This study was conducted as a prospective, cluster randomized quality improvement initiative across two academic emergency departments within a single health system. Attending emergency physicians were randomized at the provider level to either an intervention group receiving AI-generated feedback or a control group receiving standard quality reporting feedback. Randomization at the physician level was selected to minimize contamination while preserving real-world clinical workflows.
All adult patients presenting to the emergency department who met CMS criteria for severe sepsis or septic shock were eligible for inclusion. Cases were identified using clinical encounter diagnoses and evaluated according to SEP-1 specifications. Each case was classified as meeting or failing the measure based on completion of required elements within defined time windows.
In the intervention arm, an LLM-based system automatically reviewed each eligible patient encounter at the time of emergency department discharge. The system analyzed structured and unstructured clinical data to determine SEP-1 compliance and identify specific elements of care that were incomplete or not documented. Physicians received individualized feedback shortly after patient care was completed. Feedback included a summary of the case, the determination of compliance, and targeted recommendations for improvement when deficiencies were identified. In selected cases, additional follow-up communication was provided to reinforce learning and clarify opportunities for improvement.
研究设计
- 研究类型
- Interventional
- 分配方式
- Randomized
- 干预模型
- Single Group
- 主要目的
- Other
- 盲法
- None
入排标准
- 年龄范围
- 18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 否
入选标准
- •Adult patients (≥18 years) evaluated in the emergency department Clinical diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock during the emergency department encounter Cases meeting Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) SEP-1 inclusion criteria Patient encounter managed by an attending emergency physician participating in the study Sepsis "time zero" occurring during the emergency department visit
排除标准
- •Patients who do not meet CMS SEP-1 criteria for severe sepsis or septic shock Sepsis onset occurring prior to emergency department arrival or after hospital admission Encounters without sufficient clinical documentation to assess SEP-1 compliance Patients transferred from another facility with ongoing sepsis care already initiated Cases in which the attending physician of record is not assigned to a study arm
研究者
Gabriel Wardi
Associate Professor
University of California, San Diego
