Artificial intelligence to advance acute and intensive care medicine.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review explores recent key advancements in artificial intelligence for acute and intensive care medicine. As artificial intelligence rapidly evolves, this review aims to elucidate its current applications, future possibilities, and the vital challenges that are associated with its integration into emergency medical dispatch, triage, medical consultation and ICUs. RECENT FINDINGS: The integration of artificial intelligence in emergency medical dispatch (EMD) facilitates swift and accurate assessment. In the emergency department (ED), artificial intelligence driven triage models leverage diverse patient data for improved outcome predictions, surpassing human performance in retrospective studies. Artificial intelligence can streamline medical documentation in the ED and enhances medical imaging interpretation. The introduction of large multimodal generative models showcases the future potential to process varied biomedical data for comprehensive decision support. In the ICU, artificial intelligence applications range from early warning systems to treatment suggestions. SUMMARY: Despite promising academic strides, widespread artificial intelligence adoption in acute and critical care is hindered by ethical, legal, technical, organizational, and validation challenges. Despite these obstacles, artificial intelligence's potential to streamline clinical workflows is evident. When these barriers are overcome, future advancements in artificial intelligence have the potential to transform the landscape of patient care for acute and intensive care medicine.

Does Reinforcement Learning Improve Outcomes for Critically Ill Patients? A Systematic Review and Level-of-Readiness Assessment.

OBJECTIVE: Reinforcement learning (RL) is a machine learning technique uniquely effective at sequential decision-making, which makes it potentially relevant to ICU treatment challenges. We set out to systematically review, assess level-of-readiness and meta-analyze the effect of RL on outcomes for critically ill patients. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase.com, Clarivate Analytics/Web of Science Core Collection, Elsevier/SCOPUS and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore Digital Library from inception to March 25, 2022, with subsequent citation tracking. DATA EXTRACTION: Journal articles that used an RL technique in an ICU population and reported on patient health-related outcomes were included for full analysis. Conference papers were included for level-of-readiness assessment only. Descriptive statistics, characteristics of the models, outcome compared with clinician's policy and level-of-readiness were collected. RL-health risk of bias and applicability assessment was performed. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 1,033 articles were screened, of which 18 journal articles and 18 conference papers, were included. Thirty of those were prototyping or modeling articles and six were validation articles. All articles reported RL algorithms to outperform clinical decision-making by ICU professionals, but only in retrospective data. The modeling techniques for the state-space, action-space, reward function, RL model training, and evaluation varied widely. The risk of bias was high in all articles, mainly due to the evaluation procedure. CONCLUSION: In this first systematic review on the application of RL in intensive care medicine we found no studies that demonstrated improved patient outcomes from RL-based technologies. All studies reported that RL-agent policies outperformed clinician policies, but such assessments were all based on retrospective off-policy evaluation.