Objective Typically detected via electrocardiograms (ECGs), QT interval prolongation is a known risk factor for sudden cardiac death. Since medications can promote or exacerbate the condition, detection of QT interval prolongation is important for clinical decision support. We investigated the accuracy of natural language processing (NLP) for identifying QT prolongation from cardiologist-generated, free-text ECG impressions compared to corrected QT (QTc) thresholds reported by ECG machines. Methods After integrating negation detection to a locally-developed natural language processor, the KnowledgeMap concept identifier, we evaluated NLP-based detection of QT prolongation compared to the calculated QTc on a set of 44,318 ECGs obtained from hospitalized patients. We also created a string query using regular expressions to identify QT prolongation. We calculated sensitivity and specificity of the methods using manual physician review of the cardiologist-generated reports as the gold standard. To investigate causes of “false positive” calculated QTc, we manually reviewed randomly selected ECGs with a long calculated QTc but no mention of QT prolongation. Separately, we validated the performance of the negation detection algorithm on 5,000 manually-categorized ECG phrases for any medical concept (not limited to QT prolongation) prior to developing the NLP query for QT prolongation. Results The NLP query for QT prolongation correctly identified 2,364 of 2,373 ECGs with QT prolongation with a sensitivity of 0.996 and a positive predictive value of 1.000. There were no false positives. The regular expression query had a sensitivity of 0.999 and positive predictive value of 0.982. In contrast, the positive predictive value of common QTc thresholds derived from ECG machines was 0.07–0.25 with corresponding sensitivities of 0.994–0.046. The negation detection algorithm had a recall of 0.973 and precision of 0.982 for 10,490 concepts found within ECG impressions. Conclusions NLP and regular expression queries of cardiologists’ ECG interpretations can more effectively identify QT prolongation than the automated QTc intervals reported by ECG machines. Future clinical decision support could employ NLP queries to detect QTc prolongation and other reported ECG abnormalities.
Background Up to 38% of inpatient medication errors occur at the administration stage. Although they reduce prescribing errors, computerized provider order entry (CPOE) systems do not prevent administration errors or timing discrepancies. This study determined the degree to which CPOE medication orders matched actual dose administration times. METHODS At a 658-bed academic hospital with CPOE but lacking electronic medication administration charting, authors randomly selected adult patients with eligible medication orders from historical 1999-2003 CPOE log files. Retrospective manual chart audits compared expected (from CPOE) and actual timing of medication administrations. Outcomes included: dose omissions, median lag times between ordered and charted administrations, unauthorized doses, wrong dose errors, and the rate of nurses' medication schedule shifting. RESULTS Dose omissions occurred in 756 of 6019 (12.6%) audited administration opportunities; only 313 of the omissions (5.2% of opportunities) were unexplained. Wrong doses and unexpected doses occurred for 0.1% and 0.7% of opportunities, respectively. Median lag from expected first dose to actual charted administration time was 27 minutes (IQR 0-127). Nursing staff shifted from ordered to alternate administration schedules for 10.7% of regularly scheduled recurring medication orders. Chart review identified reasons for dose omissions, delays, and dose shifting. CONCLUSION Inpatient CPOE orders are legible and conveyed electronically to nurses and the pharmacy. Nonetheless, ward-based medication administrations do not consistently occur as ordered. Medication administration discrepancies are likely to persist even after implementing CPOE and bar-coded medication administration unless recommended interventions are made to address issues such as determining the true urgency of medication administration, avoiding overlapping duplicative medication orders, and developing a safe means for shifting dosing schedules.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.