scholarly journals Data linkage and statistical modelling to provide stratified risk assessment for HAI

Author(s):  
Kim Kavanagh ◽  
Jiafeng Pan ◽  
Chris Robertson ◽  
Marion Bennie ◽  
Charis Marwick ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT ObjectivesThe use of “real-time” data to support individual patient management and outcome assessment requires the development of risk assessment models. This could be delivered through a learning health system by the building robust statistical analysis tools onto the existing linked data held by NHS Scotland’s Infection Intelligence Platform (IIP) and developed within the Scottish Healthcare Associated Infection Prevention Institute (SHAIPI). This project will create prediction models for the risk of acquiring a healthcare associated infection (HAI), and particular outcomes, at the point of GP consultation/ hospital admission which could aid clinical decision making. ApproachWe demonstrate the capability using the HAI Clostridium difficile (CDI) from 2010-2013. Using linked national individual level data on community prescribing, hospitalisations, infections and death records we extracted all cases of CDI and by comparing to matched population-based controls, examined the impact of prior hospital admissions, care home residence, comorbidities, exposure to gastric acid suppressive drugs and antibiotic exposure, defined as both cumulative (total defined daily dose (DDD)) and temporal antimicrobial exposure in the previous 6 months, to the risk of CDI acquisition. Antimicrobial exposure was considered for all drugs and the higher risk broad spectrum antibiotics (4Cs). Associations are assessed using conditional logistic regression. Using cross-validation we assess the ability of the model to accurately predict CDI infection. Risk scores for acquisition of CDI are estimated by combining these predictions with age and gender population incidence. ResultsIn the period 2010-2013 there were 1446 cases of CDI with matched 7964 controls. A significant dose-response relationship for exposure to any antimicrobial (1-7 DDDs OR=2.3 rising to OR=4.4 for 29+ DDDs) and, with elevated risk, to the 4C group (1-7 DDDs OR=3.8 rising to OR=17.9 for 29+ DDDs). Exposure elevates CDI risk most in the month after prescription but for 4C antimicrobials the elevated risk remains 6 months later (4C OR=12.4 within 1 month, OR=2.6 4-6 months later). The risk of CDI was also increased with more co-morbidities, previous hospitalisations, care home residency, increased number of prescriptions, and gastric acid suppression. ConclusionDespite limitations to current application in practice,(paucity of patient level in-hospital prescribing data and constraints of the timeliness of the data), when fully developed this system will enable risk classification to identify patients most at risk of HAI and adverse outcomes to aid clinical decision making.

Aorta ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 04 (02) ◽  
pp. 42-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Christian Gasser

AbstractAbdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture is a local event in the aneurysm wall that naturally demands tools to assess the risk for local wall rupture. Consequently, global parameters like the maximum diameter and its expansion over time can only give very rough risk indications; therefore, they frequently fail to predict individual risk for AAA rupture. In contrast, the Biomechanical Rupture Risk Assessment (BRRA) method investigates the wall’s risk for local rupture by quantitatively integrating many known AAA rupture risk factors like female sex, large relative expansion, intraluminal thrombus-related wall weakening, and high blood pressure. The BRRA method is almost 20 years old and has progressed considerably in recent years, it can now potentially enrich the diameter indication for AAA repair. The present paper reviews the current state of the BRRA method by summarizing its key underlying concepts (i.e., geometry modeling, biomechanical simulation, and result interpretation). Specifically, the validity of the underlying model assumptions is critically disused in relation to the intended simulation objective (i.e., a clinical AAA rupture risk assessment). Next, reported clinical BRRA validation studies are summarized, and their clinical relevance is reviewed. The BRRA method is a generic, biomechanics-based approach that provides several interfaces to incorporate information from different research disciplines. As an example, the final section of this review suggests integrating growth aspects to (potentially) further improve BRRA sensitivity and specificity. Despite the fact that no prospective validation studies are reported, a significant and still growing body of validation evidence suggests integrating the BRRA method into the clinical decision-making process (i.e., enriching diameter-based decision-making in AAA patient treatment).


2011 ◽  
Vol 35 (11) ◽  
pp. 413-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew M. Large ◽  
Olav B. Nielssen

SummaryRisk assessment has been widely adopted in mental health settings in the hope of preventing harms such as violence to others and suicide. However, risk assessment in its current form is mainly concerned with the probability of adverse events, and does not address the other component of risk – the extent of the resulting loss. Although assessments of the probability of future harm based on actuarial instruments are generally more accurate than the categorisations made by clinicians, actuarial instruments are of little assistance in clinical decision-making because there is no instrument that can estimate the probability of all the harms associated with mental illness, or estimate the extent of the resulting losses. The inability of instruments to distinguish between the risk of common but less serious harms and comparatively rare catastrophic events is a particular limitation of the value of risk categorisations. We should admit that our ability to assess risk is severely limited, and make clinical decisions in a similar way to those in other areas of medicine – by informed consideration of the potential consequences of treatment and non-treatment.


2010 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 595-607 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric B. Elbogen ◽  
Sara Fuller ◽  
Sally C. Johnson ◽  
Stephanie Brooks ◽  
Patricia Kinneer ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaoling Zhong ◽  
◽  
Rongqin Yu ◽  
Robert Cornish ◽  
Xiaoping Wang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Violence risk assessment is a routine part of clinical services in mental health, and in particular secure psychiatric hospitals. The use of prediction models and risk tools can assist clinical decision-making on risk management, including decisions about further assessments, referral, hospitalization and treatment. In recent years, scalable evidence-based tools, such as Forensic Psychiatry and Violent Oxford (FoVOx), have been developed and validated for patients with mental illness. However, their acceptability and utility in clinical settings is not known. Therefore, we conducted a clinical impact study in multiple institutions that provided specialist mental health service. Methods We followed a two-step mixed-methods design. In phase one, we examined baseline risk factors on 330 psychiatric patients from seven forensic psychiatric institutes in China. In phase two, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 clinicians regarding violence risk assessment from ten mental health centres. We compared the FoVOx score on each admission (n = 110) to unstructured clinical risk assessment and used a thematic analysis to assess clinician views on the accuracy and utility of this tool. Results The median estimated probability of violent reoffending (FoVOx score) within 1 year was 7% (range 1–40%). There was fair agreement (72/99, 73% agreement) on the risk categories between FoVOx and clinicians’ assessment on risk categories, and moderate agreement (10/12, 83% agreement) when examining low and high risk categories. In a majority of cases (56/101, 55%), clinicians thought the FoVOx score was an accurate representation of the violent risk of an individual patient. Clinicians suggested some additional clinical, social and criminal risk factors should be considered during any comprehensive assessment. In addition, FoVOx was considered to be helpful in assisting clinical decision-making and individual risk assessment. Ten out of 11 clinicians reported that FoVOx was easy to use, eight out of 11 was practical, and all clinicians would consider using it in the future. Conclusions Clinicians found that violence risk assessment could be improved by using a simple, scalable tool, and that FoVOx was feasible and practical to use.


2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 1327-1338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul C. Schroy ◽  
Sarah E. Caron ◽  
Bonnie J. Sherman ◽  
Timothy C. Heeren ◽  
Tracy A. Battaglia

2022 ◽  
pp. 1753495X2110562
Author(s):  
Sarah CJ Jorgensen ◽  
Najla Tabbara ◽  
Lisa Burry

Pregnant people have an elevated risk of severe COVID-19-related complications compared to their non-pregnant counterparts, underscoring the need for safe and effective therapies. In this review, we summarize published data on COVID-19 therapeutics in pregnancy and lactation to help inform clinical decision-making about their use in this population. Although no serious safety signals have been raised for many agents, data clearly have serious limitations and there are many important knowledge gaps about the safety and efficacy of key therapeutics used for COVID-19. Moving forward, diligent follow-up and documentation of outcomes in pregnant people treated with these agents will be essential to advance our understanding. Greater regulatory push and incentives are needed to ensure studies to obtain pregnancy data are expedited.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document