ABSTRACT
Objective To optimize the parameters of a sepsis prediction model within distinct patient groups to minimize the excess cost of sepsis care and analyze the potential effect of factors contributing to end-user response to sepsis alerts on overall model utility.
Materials and Methods We calculated the excess costs of sepsis by comparing patients with and without a secondary sepsis diagnosis but with the same primary diagnosis and baseline comorbidities. We optimized the parameters of a sepsis prediction algorithm across different diagnostic categories to minimize these excess costs. At the optima, we evaluated diagnostic odds ratios and analyzed the impact of compliance factors—like non-compliance, treatment efficacy, and tolerance for false alarms—on the net benefit of triggering sepsis alerts.
Results Compliance factors significantly contributed to the net benefit of triggering a sepsis alert. However, a customized deployment policy can achieve a significantly higher diagnostic odds ratio and reduced costs of sepsis care. Implementing our optimization routine with powerful predictive models could result in $4.6 billion in excess cost savings for the Medicare program.
Discussion Sepsis costs and incidence vary dramatically across diagnostic categories, warranting a customized approach for implementing predictive models. We designed a framework for customizing sepsis alert protocols within different diagnostic categories to minimize excess costs and analyzed model performance as a function of false alarm tolerance and compliance with model recommendations.
Conclusion Customizing the implementation of clinical predictive models by accounting for various behavioral and economic factors may improve the practical benefit of predictive models.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Dr. Nemati has received fundings from the National Institutes of Health (R01LM013998, R01HL157985, R35GM143121). Dr. Wardi is supported by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health (K23GM37182).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Institutional Review Board (IRB) of UC San Diego approved this study (#800257) with a waiver of informed consent.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The financial data underlying this article cannot be shared publicly due to the proprietary nature of the data. Center for Medicare and Medicate Provider Utilization and Payment Data (Inpatient) used for extrapolation of costs and case-mix adjustments can be found at https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/Medicare-Provider-Charge-Data/Inpatient and https://www.cms.gov/files/zip/fy-2021-ipps-fr-case-mix-index-file.zip
