Predicting Clostridioides difficile infection outcomes with explainable machine learning.

BACKGROUND: Clostridioides difficile infection results in life-threatening short-term outcomes and the potential for subsequent recurrent infection. Predicting these outcomes at diagnosis, when important clinical decisions need to be made, has proven to be a difficult task. METHODS: 52 clinical features from existing models or the literature were collected retrospectively within ±48 h of diagnosis among 1660 inpatient infections. A modified desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) was designed to encompass clinically-important severe events attributable to the acute infection (intensive care transfer due to sepsis, shock, colectomy/ileostomy, mortality) and/or 60-day recurrence. A deep neural network was constructed and interpreted using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). High-importance features were used to train a reduced, shallow network and performance was compared to existing conventional models (7 severity, 7 recurrence; after summing DOOR probabilities to align with conventional binary outputs) using area under the ROC curve (AUROC) and DeLong tests. FINDINGS: The full (52-feature) model achieved an out-of-sample AUROC 0.823 for severity and 0.678 for recurrence. SHAP identified 13 unique, highly-important features (age, hypotension, initial treatment, onset, PCR cycle threshold, number of prior episodes, antibiotic exposure, fever, hypotension, pressors, leukocytosis, creatinine, lactate) that were used to train a reduced model, which performed similarly to the full model (severity AUROC difference P = 0.130; recurrence P = 0.426) and significantly better than the top severity model (reduced model predicting severity 0.837, ATLAS 0.749; P = 0.001). The reduced model also outperformed the top recurrence model, but this was not statistically-significant (reduced model recurrence AUROC 0.653, IDSA Recurrence Risk Criteria 0.595; P = 0.196). The final, reduced model was deployed as a web application with real-time SHAP explanations. INTERPRETATION: Our final model outperformed existing severity and recurrence models; however, it requires external validation. A DOOR output allows specific clinical questions to be asked with explainable predictions that can be feasibly implemented with limited computing resources. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health-Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Modeling relaxed policies for discontinuation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus contact precautions.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the economic costs of reducing the University of Virginia Hospital's present "3-negative" policy, which continues methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) contact precautions until patients receive 3 consecutive negative test results, to either 2 or 1 negative. DESIGN: Cost-effective analysis. SETTINGS: The University of Virginia Hospital. PATIENTS: The study included data from 41,216 patients from 2015 to 2019. METHODS: We developed a model for MRSA transmission in the University of Virginia Hospital, accounting for both environmental contamination and interactions between patients and providers, which were derived from electronic health record (EHR) data. The model was fit to MRSA incidence over the study period under the current 3-negative clearance policy. A counterfactual simulation was used to estimate outcomes and costs for 2- and 1-negative policies compared with the current 3-negative policy. RESULTS: Our findings suggest that 2-negative and 1-negative policies would have led to 6 (95% CI, -30 to 44; P < .001) and 17 (95% CI, -23 to 59; -10.1% to 25.8%; P < .001) more MRSA cases, respectively, at the hospital over the study period. Overall, the 1-negative policy has statistically significantly lower costs ($628,452; 95% CI, $513,592-$752,148) annually (P < .001) in US dollars, inflation-adjusted for 2023) than the 2-negative policy ($687,946; 95% CI, $562,522-$812,662) and 3-negative ($702,823; 95% CI, $577,277-$846,605). CONCLUSIONS: A single negative MRSA nares PCR test may provide sufficient evidence to discontinue MRSA contact precautions, and it may be the most cost-effective option.