No abstract

Introduction In 2007, Congress asked the Department of Veteran Affairs to pay closer attention to the incidence of sleep disorders among veterans. We aimed to use natural language processing (NLP), a method that applies algorithms to understand the meaning and structure of sentences within Electronic Health Record (EHR) patient free-text notes, to identify the number of attended polysomnography (PSG) studies conducted in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and to evaluate the performance of NLP in extracting sleep data from the notes. Methods We identified 481,115 sleep studies using CPT code 95810 from 2000-19 in the national VHA. We used rule-based regular expression method (phrases: “sleep stage” and “arousal index”) to identify attended PSG reports in the patient free-text notes in the EHR, of which 69,847 records met the rule-based criteria. We randomly selected 178 notes to compare the accuracy of the algorithm in mining sleep parameters: total sleep time (TST), sleep efficiency (SE) and sleep onset latency (SOL) compared to human manual chart review. Results The number of documented PSG studies increased each year from 963 in 2000 to 14,209 in 2018. System performance of NLP compared to manually annotated reference standard in detecting sleep parameters was 83% for TST, 87% for SE, and 81% for SOL (accuracy benchmark ≥ 80%). Conclusion This study showed that NLP is a useful technique to mine EHR and extract data from patients’ free-text notes. Reasons that NLP is not 100% accurate included, the note authors used different phrasing (e.g., “recording duration”) which the NLP algorithm did not detect/extract or authors omitting sleep continuity variables from the notes. Nevertheless, this automated strategy to identify and extract sleep data can serve as an effective tool in large health care systems to be used for research and evaluation to improve sleep medicine patient care and outcomes. Support This material is based upon work supported in part by the Department of Veteran Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Office of Research and Development, and the Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety (CIN 13-413). Dr. Nowakowski is also supported by a National Institutes of Health (NIH) Grant (R01NR018342).

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the way medical education is delivered. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the education and procedural volume of critical care and pulmonary critical care fellows. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional, internet-based, voluntary, anonymous, national survey of adult critical care fellows and academic attending physicians in critical care and pulmonary critical care fellowship programs in the United States between December 2020 and February 2021. Survey questions covered both didactic and non-didactic aspects of education and procedural volumes. Answers were ranked on a 5-point Likert scale. Survey responses were summarized by frequency with percentage. Differences between the responses of fellows and attendings were assessed with the Fisher’s exact or Chi-Square test, using Stata 16 software (StataCorp LLC, College Station, TX). Results Seventy four individuals responded to the survey; the majority (70.3%) were male; less than one-third (28.4%) female. Respondents were evenly split among fellows (52.7%) and attendings (47.3%). 41.9% of survey respondents were from the authors’ home institution, with a response rate of 32.6%. Almost two-thirds (62.2%) reported that fellows spend more time in the ICU since the onset of the pandemic. The majority noted that fellows insert more central venous catheters (52.7%) and arterial lines (58.1%), but perform fewer bronchoscopies (59.5%). The impact on endotracheal intubations was mixed: almost half of respondents (45.9%) reported fewer intubations, about one-third (35.1%) more intubations. Almost all respondents (93.0%) described fewer workshops; and one-third (36.1%) fewer didactic lectures. The majority (71.2%) noted less time available for research and quality improvement projects; half (50.7%) noted less bedside teaching by faculty and more than one-third (37.0%) less fellow interaction with faculty. Almost one-half of respondents (45.2%) reported an increase in fellows’ weekly work hours. Conclusion The pandemic has caused a decrease in scholarly and didactic activities of critical care and pulmonary critical care fellows. Fellows spend more time in ICU rotations, insert more central and arterial lines, but perform fewer intubations and bronchoscopies. This survey provides insights into changes that have occurred in the training of critical care and pulmonary critical care fellows since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

No abstract