Implementing Predictive Tools in Surgery: A Narrative Review in the Context of Orthopaedic Surgery

Overview

Journal ANZ J Surg

Specialties General Medicine
General Surgery

Date 2022 Sep 15

PMID 36106676

Authors

Yuxuan Zhou

Daniel Gould

Peter Choong

Michelle Dowsey

Chris Schilling

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Clinical predictive tools are a topic gaining interest. Many tools are developed each year to predict various outcomes in medicine and surgery. However, the proportion of predictive tools that are implemented in clinical practice is small in comparison to the total number of tools developed. This narrative review presents key principles to guide the translation of predictive tools from academic bodies of work into useful tools that complement clinical practice. Our review identified the following principles: (1) identifying a clinical gap, (2) selecting a target user or population, (3) optimizing predictive tool performance, (4) externally validating predictive tools, (5) marketing and disseminating the tool, (6) navigating the challenges of integrating a tool into existing healthcare systems, and (7) developing an ongoing monitoring and evaluation strategy. Although the review focuses on examples in orthopaedic surgery, the principles can be applied to other disciplines in medicine and surgery.

Citing Articles

Artificial Intelligence in Surgery: A Systematic Review of Use and Validation.

Kenig N, Monton Echeverria J, Muntaner Vives A J Clin Med. 2024; 13(23).

PMID: 39685566 PMC: 11642125. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13237108.

The ability of artificial intelligence tools to formulate orthopaedic clinical decisions in comparison to human clinicians: An analysis of ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4, and Bard.

Agharia S, Szatkowski J, Fraval A, Stevens J, Zhou Y J Orthop. 2023; 50:1-7.

PMID: 38148925 PMC: 10749221. DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2023.11.063.

Machine learning algorithms to predict risk of postoperative pneumonia in elderly with hip fracture.

Guo J, He Q, Peng C, Dai R, Li W, Su Z J Orthop Surg Res. 2023; 18(1):571.

PMID: 37543618 PMC: 10403839. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04049-0.

References

Siontis G, Tzoulaki I, Castaldi P, Ioannidis J . External validation of new risk prediction models is infrequent and reveals worse prognostic discrimination. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014; 68(1):25-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.09.007. View

Rajkomar A, Hardt M, Howell M, Corrado G, Chin M . Ensuring Fairness in Machine Learning to Advance Health Equity. Ann Intern Med. 2018; 169(12):866-872. PMC: 6594166. DOI: 10.7326/M18-1990. View

Lenert M, Matheny M, Walsh C . Prognostic models will be victims of their own success, unless…. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019; 26(12):1645-1650. PMC: 6857506. DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocz145. View

Loftus T, Tighe P, Ozrazgat-Baslanti T, Davis J, Ruppert M, Ren Y . Ideal algorithms in healthcare: Explainable, dynamic, precise, autonomous, fair, and reproducible. PLOS Digit Health. 2022; 1(1). PMC: 9754299. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000006. View

Han S, Azad T, Suarez P, Ratliff J . A machine learning approach for predictive models of adverse events following spine surgery. Spine J. 2019; 19(11):1772-1781. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2019.06.018. View

Elwyn G, Scholl I, Tietbohl C, Mann M, Edwards A, Clay C . "Many miles to go …": a systematic review of the implementation of patient decision support interventions into routine clinical practice. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2014; 13 Suppl 2:S14. PMC: 4044318. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S14. View

Eekholm S, Ahlstrom G, Kristensson J, Lindhardt T . Gaps between current clinical practice and evidence-based guidelines for treatment and care of older patients with Community Acquired Pneumonia: a descriptive cross-sectional study. BMC Infect Dis. 2020; 20(1):73. PMC: 6979078. DOI: 10.1186/s12879-019-4742-4. View

Wong C, Khin L, Heng K, Tan K, Low C . The LRINEC (Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis) score: a tool for distinguishing necrotizing fasciitis from other soft tissue infections. Crit Care Med. 2004; 32(7):1535-41. DOI: 10.1097/01.ccm.0000129486.35458.7d. View

Artetxe A, Beristain A, Grana M . Predictive models for hospital readmission risk: A systematic review of methods. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2018; 164:49-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2018.06.006. View

10.

Bone R, Balk R, Cerra F, Dellinger R, Fein A, Knaus W . Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest. 1992; 101(6):1644-55. DOI: 10.1378/chest.101.6.1644. View

11.

Watson H, Seed P, Carter J, Hezelgrave N, Kuhrt K, Tribe R . Development and validation of predictive models for QUiPP App v.2: tool for predicting preterm birth in asymptomatic high-risk women. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019; 55(3):348-356. DOI: 10.1002/uog.20401. View

12.

Cichosz S, Johansen M, Hejlesen O . Toward Big Data Analytics: Review of Predictive Models in Management of Diabetes and Its Complications. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015; 10(1):27-34. PMC: 4738225. DOI: 10.1177/1932296815611680. View

13.

Schmidt A, Cappucciati M, Radua J, Rutigliano G, Rocchetti M, DellOsso L . Improving Prognostic Accuracy in Subjects at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Systematic Review of Predictive Models and Meta-analytical Sequential Testing Simulation. Schizophr Bull. 2016; 43(2):375-388. PMC: 5605272. DOI: 10.1093/schbul/sbw098. View

14.

Soto-Mota A, Marfil-Garza B, Castiello-de Obeso S, Martinez Rodriguez E, Carrillo Vazquez D, Tadeo-Espinoza H . Prospective predictive performance comparison between clinical gestalt and validated COVID-19 mortality scores. J Investig Med. 2021; 70(2):415-420. DOI: 10.1136/jim-2021-002037. View

15.

Loftus T, Tighe P, Filiberto A, Efron P, Brakenridge S, Mohr A . Artificial Intelligence and Surgical Decision-making. JAMA Surg. 2019; 155(2):148-158. PMC: 7286802. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.4917. View

16.

Senanayake S, White N, Graves N, Healy H, Baboolal K, Kularatna S . Machine learning in predicting graft failure following kidney transplantation: A systematic review of published predictive models. Int J Med Inform. 2019; 130:103957. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.103957. View

17.

Wells P, Anderson D, Rodger M, Stiell I, DREYER J, Barnes D . Excluding pulmonary embolism at the bedside without diagnostic imaging: management of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism presenting to the emergency department by using a simple clinical model and d-dimer. Ann Intern Med. 2001; 135(2):98-107. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-135-2-200107170-00010. View

18.

Panch T, Szolovits P, Atun R . Artificial intelligence, machine learning and health systems. J Glob Health. 2018; 8(2):020303. PMC: 6199467. DOI: 10.7189/jogh.08.020303. View

19.

Watson J, Hutyra C, Clancy S, Chandiramani A, Bedoya A, Ilangovan K . Overcoming barriers to the adoption and implementation of predictive modeling and machine learning in clinical care: what can we learn from US academic medical centers?. JAMIA Open. 2020; 3(2):167-172. PMC: 7382631. DOI: 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooz046. View

20.

Colubri A, Silver T, Fradet T, Retzepi K, Fry B, Sabeti P . Transforming Clinical Data into Actionable Prognosis Models: Machine-Learning Framework and Field-Deployable App to Predict Outcome of Ebola Patients. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016; 10(3):e0004549. PMC: 4798608. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004549. View