A community-of-practice-based evaluation methodology for knowledge intensive computational methods and its application to multimorbidity decision support.

OBJECTIVE: The study has dual objectives. Our first objective (1) is to develop a community-of-practice-based evaluation methodology for knowledge-intensive computational methods. We target a whitebox analysis of the computational methods to gain insight on their functional features and inner workings. In more detail, we aim to answer evaluation questions on (i) support offered by computational methods for functional features within the application domain; and (ii) in-depth characterizations of the underlying computational processes, models, data and knowledge of the computational methods. Our second objective (2) involves applying the evaluation methodology to answer questions (i) and (ii) for knowledge-intensive clinical decision support (CDS) methods, which operationalize clinical knowledge as computer interpretable guidelines (CIG); we focus on multimorbidity CIG-based clinical decision support (MGCDS) methods that target multimorbidity treatment plans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our methodology directly involves the research community of practice in (a) identifying functional features within the application domain; (b) defining exemplar case studies covering these features; and (c) solving the case studies using their developed computational methods-research groups detail their solutions and functional feature support in solution reports. Next, the study authors (d) perform a qualitative analysis of the solution reports, identifying and characterizing common themes (or dimensions) among the computational methods. This methodology is well suited to perform whitebox analysis, as it directly involves the respective developers in studying inner workings and feature support of computational methods. Moreover, the established evaluation parameters (e.g., features, case studies, themes) constitute a re-usable benchmark framework, which can be used to evaluate new computational methods as they are developed. We applied our community-of-practice-based evaluation methodology on MGCDS methods. RESULTS: Six research groups submitted comprehensive solution reports for the exemplar case studies. Solutions for two of these case studies were reported by all groups. We identified four evaluation dimensions: detection of adverse interactions, management strategy representation, implementation paradigms, and human-in-the-loop support. Based on our whitebox analysis, we present answers to the evaluation questions (i) and (ii) for MGCDS methods. DISCUSSION: The proposed evaluation methodology includes features of illuminative and comparison-based approaches; focusing on understanding rather than judging/scoring or identifying gaps in current methods. It involves answering evaluation questions with direct involvement of the research community of practice, who participate in setting up evaluation parameters and solving exemplar case studies. Our methodology was successfully applied to evaluate six MGCDS knowledge-intensive computational methods. We established that, while the evaluated methods provide a multifaceted set of solutions with different benefits and drawbacks, no single MGCDS method currently provides a comprehensive solution for MGCDS. CONCLUSION: We posit that our evaluation methodology, applied here to gain new insights into MGCDS, can be used to assess other types of knowledge-intensive computational methods and answer other types of evaluation questions. Our case studies can be accessed at our GitHub repository (https://github.com/william-vw/MGCDS).

Following Evidence-Based Recommendations for Perioperative Pain Management after Cesarean Section Is Associated with Better Pain-Related Outcomes: Analysis of Registry Data.

Women who have had a Cesarean Section (CS) frequently report severe pain and pain-related interference. One reason for insufficient pain treatment might be inconsistent implementation of evidence-based guidelines. We assessed the association between implementing three elements of care recommended by guidelines for postoperative pain management and pain-related patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in women after CS. The analysis relied on an anonymized dataset of women undergoing CS, retrieved from PAIN OUT. PAIN OUT, an international perioperative pain registry, provides clinicians with treatment assessment methodology and tools for patients to assess multi-dimensional pain-related PROs on the first postoperative day. We examined whether the care included [i] regional anesthesia with a neuraxial opioid OR general anesthesia with wound infiltration or a Transvesus Abdominis Plane block; [ii] at least one non-opioid analgesic at the full daily dose; and [iii] pain assessment and recording. Credit for care was given only if all three elements were administered (= "full"); otherwise, it was "incomplete". A "Pain Composite Score-total" (PCStotal), evaluating outcomes of pain intensity, pain-related interference with function, and side-effects, was the primary endpoint in the total cohort (women receiving GA and/or RA) or a sub-group of women with RA only. Data from 5182 women was analyzed. "Full" care was administered to 20% of women in the total cohort and to 21% in the RA sub-group. In both groups, the PCStotal was significantly lower compared to "incomplete" care (p < 0.001); this was a small-to-moderate effect size. Administering all three elements of care was associated with better pain-related outcomes after CS. These should be straightforward and inexpensive for integration into routine care after CS. However, even in this group, a high proportion of women reported poor outcomes, indicating that additional work needs to be carried out to close the evidence-practice gap so that women who have undergone CS can be comfortable when caring for themselves and their newborn.

Towards a framework for comparing functionalities of multimorbidity clinical decision support: A literature-based feature set and benchmark cases.

Multimorbidity, the coexistence of two or more health conditions, has become more prevalent as mortality rates in many countries have declined and their populations have aged. Multimorbidity presents significant difficulties for Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS), particularly in cases where recommendations from relevant clinical guidelines offer conflicting advice. A number of research groups are developing computer-interpretable guideline (CIG) modeling formalisms that integrate recommendations from multiple Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) for knowledge-based multimorbidity decision support. In this paper we describe work towards the development of a framework for comparing the different approaches to multimorbidity CIG-based clinical decision support (MGCDS). We present (1) a set of features for MGCDS, which were derived using a literature review and evaluated by physicians using a survey, and (2) a set of benchmarking case studies, which illustrate the clinical application of these features. This work represents the first necessary step in a broader research program aimed at the development of a benchmark framework that allows for standardized and comparable MGCDS evaluations, which will facilitate the assessment of functionalities of MGCDS, as well as highlight important gaps in the state-of-the-art. We also outline our future work on developing the framework, specifically, (3) a standard for reporting MGCDS solutions for the benchmark case studies, and (4) criteria for evaluating these MGCDS solutions. We plan to conduct a large-scale comparison study of existing MGCDS based on the comparative framework.

Does nociception monitor-guided anesthesia affect opioid consumption? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Monitors that estimate nociception during anesthesia may be used to guide opioid and other analgesics administration to optimize anesthesia care and possibly outcome. We reviewed the literature to evaluate current evidence of the effect of nociception-guided management over standard anesthesia practice during surgery. A systematic review of the literature on the effect of nociception monitoring on anesthesia practice was conducted. Reports were eligible if they compared nociception-guided anesthesia to standard practice during surgery. Primary endpoint of this review is intraoperative opioid consumption. Secondary endpoints included hemodynamic control, postoperative pain and pain treatment. We identified 12 randomized controlled trials that compared one of five different nociception monitoring techniques to standard anesthesia care. Most studies were single center studies of small sample size. Six studies reported intraoperative opioid consumption as primary outcome. There was considerable variability with respect to surgical procedure and anesthesia technique. For nociception monitors that were investigated by more than one study, analysis of the pooled data was performed. The surgical plethysmographic index was the only monitor for which an intra operative opioid sparing effect was found. For the other monitors, either no effect was detected, or pooled analysis could not be performed due to paucity of study data. On secondary outcomes, no consistent effect of nociception-guided anesthesia could be established. Although some nociception monitors show promising results, no definitive conclusions regarding the effect of nociception monitoring on intraoperative opioid consumption or other anesthesia related outcome can be drawn.Clinical trial number PROSPERO ID 102913.

Preliminary Intraoperative Validation of the Nociception Level Index: A Noninvasive Nociception Monitor.

BACKGROUND: The nociception level (NoL) index is an index of nociception based on nonlinear combination of heart rate, heart rate variability, photoplethysmograph wave amplitude, skin conductance, skin conductance fluctuations, and their time derivatives. The authors evaluated the abilities of the NoL index and other measures of nociception to discriminate between noxious and nonnoxious stimuli, to progressively respond to graded stimuli, and to respond to opioid administration. METHODS: Intraoperative NoL was compared to heart rate, pulse plethysmograph amplitude, noninvasive blood pressure, and the surgical pleth index around five specific stimuli: tetanic stimulation with and without fentanyl analgesia, intubation, first incision/trocar insertion, and a nonnoxious period. The response around first incision was analyzed at two target plasma concentrations of remifentanil. RESULTS: In 58 patients, the NoL index responded progressively to increased stimulus intensity and remained unchanged in response to nonnoxious stimuli. Compared to other accepted measures of nociception, the NoL index better discriminated noxious from nonnoxious stimuli with an area under the curve of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89 to 0.97) and a sensitivity of 87% at a specificity of 84%. The NoL index was the only measure that reliably reflected two different analgesic concentrations of remifentanil during initial skin incision or trocar insertion. CONCLUSIONS: The NoL index changes proportionately with patients' response to various clinical and experimental noxious stimuli and discriminates noxious from nonnoxious stimuli with high sensitivity and specificity. The NoL index also responds progressively to increasing stimuli intensity and is appropriately blunted by analgesic administration. The NoL index was superior to other compared measures and appears to accurately characterize nociception during general anesthesia.

Sedation for children with intraoral injuries in the emergency department: a case-control study.

OBJECTIVE: Intraoral procedures (IOPs) are performed within the oral cavity of a spontaneously breathing, deeply sedated child. The objective of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the safety of sedation for IOP in a pediatric emergency department. METHODS: An unmatched, case-control study was conducted. The records of patients who had an IOP between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2012, were analyzed. We evaluated the rate of serious adverse events during sedation (SAEDS) in patients who had an IOP (case subjects) and in patients who had a closed reduction of a forearm fracture (controls) and compared the 2 cohorts. RESULTS: Forty-one study subjects and 38 controls had complete records. Demographic characteristics were similar for both groups. Cases and controls were treated with the combination of propofol-ketamine for most of the cases (30/41 [73.2%] and 32/38 [84.2%]), and doses were similar between the groups. Study subjects had 5 hypoxic events and 2 apneic events; controls had 4 hypoxic events and 2 apneic events. No aspiration events were recorded. There were no statistically significant differences in the rate of SAEDS between the 2 groups (P = 0.55 and P = 0.54, respectively). All SAEDS were successfully managed in the emergency department, and no patient required hospitalization due to an adverse reaction. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of this study suggest that when performed by a skilled provider, sedation for an IOP is as safe as sedation for a fracture reduction.

Monitoring the nociception level: a multi-parameter approach.

The aim of the present study was to develop and validate an objective index for nociception level (NoL) of patients under general anesthesia, based on a combination of multiple physiological parameters. Twenty-five patients scheduled for elective surgery were enrolled. For clinical reference of NoL, the combined index of stimulus and analgesia was defined as a composite of the surgical stimulus level and a scaled effect-site concentration of opioid. The physiological parameters heart rate, heart rate variability (0.15-0.4 Hz band power), plethysmograph wave amplitude, skin conductance level, number of skin conductance fluctuations, and their time derivatives, were extracted. Two techniques to incorporate these parameters into a single index representing the NoL have been proposed: NoLlinear, based on an ordinary linear regression, and NoLnon-linear, based on a non-linear Random Forest regression. NoLlinear and NoLnon-linear significantly increased after moderate to severe noxious stimuli (Wilcoxon rank test, p < 0.01), while the individual parameters only partially responded. Receiver operating curve analysis showed that NoL index based on both techniques better discriminated noxious and non-noxious surgical events [area under curve (AUC) = 0.97] compared with individual parameters (AUC = 0.56-0.74). NoLnon-linear better ranked the level of nociception compared with NoLlinear (R = 0.88 vs. 0.77, p < 0.01). These results demonstrate the superiority of multi-parametric approach over any individual parameter in the evaluation of nociceptive response. In addition, advanced non-linear technique may have an advantage over ordinary linear regression for computing NoL index. Further research will define the usability of the NoL index as a clinical tool to assess the level of nociception during general anesthesia.

[Perioperative anti-platelet therapy management--protocol suggestion].

BACKGROUND: Currently, dual antiplatelet treatment is conducted with aspirin and clopidogrel. Preterm termination of combined treatment may cause morbidity and mortality. In patients about to undergo surgery, antiplatelet treatment is withheld before the operation to avoid perioperative excessive bleeding. As a consequence, these patients are at high perioperative thromboembolic risk. AIM: A perioperative antiplatelet management protocol developed by a dedicated committee will be presented. This protocol guides the physician while preparing the patient for surgery through three steps: (a) What is the indication for dual antiplatelet treatment and what are the patient's thrombotic risk factors? (b) How severe is the expected operative bleeding? (c) The combination of steps (a) and (b) leads to a recommendation on whether to stop antiplatelet treatment, when and for how long, or to continue antiplatelet treatment throughout the operation. In extreme cases, the indication for antiplateLet treatment may be absolute (for example: 2 months after a drug eluting stent coronary implantation), but the expected operative bleeding is very high and the operation cannot be deferred (e.g., neurosurgery for growth removal). Such cases are referred to an expert consulting committee. EXPECTED RESULTS: Many articles have pointed out the problems of current perioperative antiplatelet management and call for change. A precise assessment of the patient's indications, risk factors and perioperative bleeding, as guided by the suggested protocol, will result in better antiplatelet perioperative treatment, and will avoid both thromboembolic and bleeding risks.

Entropy values of intellectually-disabled and normal children undergoing deep intravenous sedation for dental treatment.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous sedation is an efficient method to facilitate dental treatment delivery to uncooperative children. Entropy is used for monitoring anesthetic depth. Nonetheless, scarce data is found on entropy monitoring in intellectually-disabled patients during sedation. OBJECTIVE: This comparative study set out to evaluate entropy values of normal and intellectually-disabled patients during the steady state period of deep sedation and awakening. Additionally, the study aimed to establish whether normal and intellectually-disabled patients reached a comparable clinically assessed state of sedation and the doses of total anesthetic drugs administered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 30 patients were included in the study and divided into two groups: 16 normal and 14 intellectually-disabled children. Ages ranged between 2 to 16 years. All patients were assigned to receive dental treatment under intravenous sedation. Entropy tracings were recorded for all patients. Clinical sedation level was assessed every 5 minutes. Drug administration was guided clinically. The anesthesiologist was blinded to entropy tracing. RESULTS: Although sedation levels assessed clinically were similar between groups, entropy values were significantly lower in the group of intellectually-disabled patients both during sedation steady state and waking. The total amount of anesthetic drugs administered to normal patients was higher compared to intellectually-disabled patients. CONCLUSION: In this study, entropy monitoring was found to be a more sensitive modality for assessing intra-operative brain activity during steady state sedation compared to clinical assessment of sedation. Despite similar clinical assessment of sedation level, brain activity was lower in the intellectually-disabled group as were their anesthetic drug requirements. We conclude that intellectually-disabled patients may need less anesthetic drugs to reach a good level of sedation. Whether the lower level of brain activity during sedation, reflected by lower entropy tracings, is characteristic of the intellectually disabled warrants additional studies.