IntroductionAlthough studies have examined the utility of clinical decision support tools in improving acute kidney injury (AKI) outcomes, no study has evaluated the effect of real-time, personalised AKI recommendations. This study aims to assess the impact of individualised AKI-specific recommendations delivered by trained clinicians and pharmacists immediately after AKI detection in hospitalised patients.Methods and analysisKAT-AKI is a multicentre randomised investigator-blinded trial being conducted across eight hospitals at two major US hospital systems planning to enrol 4000 patients over 3 years (between 1 November 2021 and 1 November 2024). A real-time electronic AKI alert system informs a dedicated team composed of a physician and pharmacist who independently review the chart in real time, screen for eligibility and provide combined recommendations across the following domains: diagnostics, volume, potassium, acid–base and medications. Recommendations are delivered to the primary team in the alert arm or logged for future analysis in the usual care arm. The planned primary outcome is a composite of AKI progression, dialysis and mortality within 14 days from randomisation. A key secondary outcome is the percentage of recommendations implemented by the primary team within 24 hours from randomisation. The study has enrolled 500 individuals over 8.5 months. Two-thirds were on a medical floor at the time of the alert and 17.8% were in an intensive care unit. Virtually all participants were recommended for at least one diagnostic intervention. More than half (51.6%) had recommendations to discontinue or dose-adjust a medication. The median time from AKI alert to randomisation was 28 (IQR 15.8–51.5) min.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the ethics committee of each study site (Yale University and Johns Hopkins institutional review board (IRB) and a central IRB (BRANY, Biomedical Research Alliance of New York). We are committed to open dissemination of the data through clinicaltrials.gov and sharing of data on an open repository as well as publication in a peer-reviewed journal on completion.Trial registration numberNCT04040296.
Background Physician fatigue increases the likelihood of medical errors. Eye-tracking technology offers an unobtrusive and objective way to measure fatigue but has only been implemented in controlled settings.
Objective Our objective was to determine the feasibility of capturing physiological indicators of fatigue using eye-tracking technology in a real-world clinical setting.
Methods A mixed-methods feasibility study was performed in a convenience sample of clinicians practicing in an urban, academic emergency department from November 11 to December 15, 2021. Outcomes included fatigue assessed at the beginning and end of each shift via eye-tracking (with low scores indicating greater fatigue) and self-report.
Results Among 15 participants, self-reported fatigue and task load increased from the beginning to the end of their shift (fatigue visual analog scale [FVAS] 3.7–4.6, p = 0.04; physician task load [PTL] 97.7–154.3, p = 0.01). It was feasible to collect eye-tracking data at a fixed computer workstation with twice daily calibration and 61% capture of reliable data when the clinician was working at the study computer. Eye-tracking metrics did not change significantly from the beginning to the end of the shift. Eye metric fatigue score was associated with the change in PTL score (r 0.59, p = 0.02) but not FVAS. This association persisted after adjusting for age, gender, and role, with every 10-point increase in PTL, there was a 0.02-point increase in fatigue score (p = 0.04).
Conclusion It is unclear whether the inability to detect fatigue via eye-tracking in routine clinical care was due to confounding factors, the technology, study design, sample size, or an absence of physiological fatigue. Further research and advances in functionality are needed to determine the eye-tracking technology's role in measuring clinician fatigue in routine care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.