Using AI-based virtual triage to improve acuity-level alignment of patient care seeking in an ambulatory care setting

A. Gellert George , Garber Lawrence , Kabat-Karabon Aleksandra , Kuszczynski Kacper , Price Tim , J.McLean Eric , Trybucka Katarzyna , W. Nichols Matthew , M. Pike Jennifer , J. Powers Michael , M. Orzechowski Piotr

International Journal of Healthcare ›› 2024, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (1) : 41 -50.

PDF (271KB)
International Journal of Healthcare ›› 2024, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (1) : 41 -50. DOI: 10.5430/ijh.v10n1p41
Original Articles
research-article

Using AI-based virtual triage to improve acuity-level alignment of patient care seeking in an ambulatory care setting

Author information +
History +
PDF (271KB)

Abstract

Objective: Evaluate how an AI-based virtual triage (VT) and care referral technology impacted live triage and care referral in an outpatient/ambulatory care network.
Methods:Analysis of a dataset of 8,088 outpatient online encounters assessed how VT influenced patient care seeking action/behavior.
Results:There were modest decreases in patients seeking outpatient care, including in-person or video face-to-face encounters (-12.5%), or engaging self-care (-8.2%). Patient engagement of virtual care through e-visits and telephone calls increased moderately (19.1%). One-third (35.0%) of patients changed care seeking likely as a result of VT care referral. Another third (32.3%) reported a pre-VT care intent aligned with the VT care recommendation, and a third (32.7%) did not change care sought when their pre-VT intent was not aligned. A total of 12.0% de-escalated acuity of care seeking as recommended by VT, most frequently from outpatient care to virtual care (6.5%) or self-care (4.3%). When VT recommended care de-escalation, 53.5% de-escalated care. In 21.2% care acuity was escalated, of whom 10.6% pursued virtual care and 7.5% pursued outpatient care instead of self-care, while 3.1% whose care intent was virtual care instead pursued outpatient care. When VT recommended care escalation, 96.2% escalated care. Overall, 26.7% of patients required no further action or involvement of clinical staff.
Conclusions: Virtual triage impacted patient care seeking action/behavior among almost half of patients whose pre-VT intent differed from the VT recommendation, with patients nearly twice as likely to follow recommendations to seek higher rather than lower levels of care acuity, while modestly reducing the number of face-to-face visits and increasing virtual care. Overall, a quarter of patients using VT were able to perform self-care without interacting with the healthcare team. Virtual triage has the potential to efficiently and effectively redirect patients to more appropriate levels of care.

Keywords

Virtual triage / Digital clinical triage / Artificial intelligence / Care acuity level / Nurse triage / Ambulatory care

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
A. Gellert George, Garber Lawrence, Kabat-Karabon Aleksandra, Kuszczynski Kacper, Price Tim, J.McLean Eric, Trybucka Katarzyna, W. Nichols Matthew, M. Pike Jennifer, J. Powers Michael, M. Orzechowski Piotr. Using AI-based virtual triage to improve acuity-level alignment of patient care seeking in an ambulatory care setting. International Journal of Healthcare, 2024, 10(1): 41-50 DOI:10.5430/ijh.v10n1p41

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户 忘记密码

References

[1]

Kang DY, Cho KJ, Kwon O, et al. Artificial intelligence algorithm to predict the need for critical care in prehospital emergency med-ical services. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2020; 28(1): 17. PMid:32131867. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-020-0713-4

[2]

Morse KE, Ostberg NP, Jones VG, et al. Use Characteristics and triage acuity of a digital symptom checker in a large integrated health system: Population-based descriptive study. J Med Internet Res. 2020; 22(11): e20549. PMid:33170799. https://doi.org/10.2196/20549

[3]

Akbar F, Mark G, Warton EM, et al. Physicians’ electronic inbox work patterns and factors associated with high inbox work duration. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021; 28(5): 923-930. PMid:33063087. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaa229

[4]

Lieu TA, Altschuler A, Weiner JZ, et al. Primary care physicians’ experiences with and strategies for managing electronic messages. JAMA Netw Open. 2019; 2(12): e1918287. PMid:31880798. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.18287

[5]

Winward S, Patel T, Al-Saffar M, et al. The Effect of 24/7, Digital-First, NHS primary care on acute hospital spending: retrospective observational analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2021; 23(7): e24917. PMid:34292160. https://doi.org/10.2196/24917

[6]

Stanley AL, Edwards TC, Jaere MD, et al. An automated, web based triage tool may optimise referral pathways in elective or-thopaedic surgery: A proof-of-concept study. Digit Health. 2023; 9: 20552076231152177. PMid:36762026. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076231152177

[7]

Berry AC, Cash BD, Wang B, et al. Online symptom checker diag-nostic and triage accuracy for HIV and hepatitis C. Epidemiol Infect. 2019; 147: e104. PMid:30869052. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268819000268

[8]

Gilbert S, Mehl A, Baluch A, et al. How accurate are digital symp-tom assessment apps for suggesting conditions and urgency advice?A clinical vignettes comparison to GPs. BMJ Open. 2020; 10(12): e040269. PMid:33328258. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040269

[9]

Hill MG, Sim M, Mills B. The quality of diagnosis and triage advice provided by free online symptom checkers and apps in Australia. Med J Aust. 2020; 212(11): 514-519. PMid:32391611. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja2.50600

[10]

Blanchard S. NHS-backed GP chatbot is branded a public health danger. Daily Mail, February 27, 2019. Available from: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-6751393/NHS-backed-GP-chatbot-branded-public-health-danger.html

[11]

Reliant Medical Group, Infermedica Symptom Checker Clinical Re-view, June 2021, personal communication.

[12]

Jones S, Moulton C, Swift S, et al. Association between delays to patient admission from the emergency department and all-cause 30-day mortality. Emerg Med J. 2022; 39: 168-173. PMid:35042695. https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2021-211572

[13]

Taghaddosi M, Dianati M, Fath Gharib Bidgoli J, et al. Delay and its related factors in seeking treatment in patients with acute myocardial infarction. ARYA Atheroscler. 2010; 6(1): 35-41.

[14]

Rafi A, Sayeed Z, Sultana P, et al. Pre-hospital delay in patients with myocardial infarction: an observational study in a tertiary care hospital of northern Bangladesh. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020; 633. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-15704/v1

[15]

De Luca G, Suryapranata H, Ottervanger JP, et al. Time delay to treatment and mortality in primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: every minute of delay counts. Circulation. 2004; 109(10): 1223-5. PMid:15007008. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000121424.76486.20

[16]

Leslie WS, Urie A, Hooper J, et al. Delay in calling for help during myocardial infarction: reasons for the delay and subsequent pat-tern of accessing care. Heart. 2000; 84(2): 137-41. PMid:10908246. https://doi.org/10.1136/heart.84.2.137

[17]

Magnusson C, Herlitz J, Sunnerhagen KS, et al. Prehospital recog-nition of stroke is associated with a lower risk of death. Acta Neurol Scand. 2022; 146(2): 126-136. PMid:35385136. https://doi.org/10.1111/ane.13618

[18]

Fladt J, Meier N, Thilemann S, et al. Reasons for prehospital delay in acute ischemic stroke. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019; 8(20): e013101. PMid:31576773. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.013101

[19]

Daniel P, Rodrigo C, McKeever TM, et al. Time to first antibiotic and mortality in adults hospitalised with community-acquired pneu-monia: a matched-propensity analysis. Thorax. 2016; 71(6): 568-70. PMid:26559161. https://doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2015-207513

[20]

Mansella G, Keil C, Nickel CH, et al. Delayed diagnosis in pul-monary embolism: Frequency, patient characteristics, and out-come. Respiration. 2020; 99(7): 589-597. PMid:32694258. https://doi.org/10.1159/000508396

[21]

Walen S, Damoiseaux RA, Uil SM, et al. Diagnostic delay of pul-monary embolism in primary and secondary care: a retrospective co-hort study. Br J Gen Pract. 2016; 66(647): e444-50. PMid:27114207. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp16X685201

[22]

van Maanen R, Trinks-Roerdink EM, Rutten FH, et al. A system-atic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic delay in pulmonary em-bolism. Eur J Gen Pract. 2022; 28(1): 165-172. PMid:35730378. https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2022.2086232

[23]

Gellert GA, Kabat-Karabon A, Gellert GL, et al. The potential of virtual triage AI to improve early detection, care acuity align-ment and emergent care referral of life-threatening conditions. Fron-tiers in Public Health. 2024; 12: 1362246. PMid:38807993. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1362246

AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF (271KB)

396

Accesses

0

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

AI思维导图

/