Computer versus physician identification of gastrointestinal alarm features

Abstract

Objective It is important for clinicians to inquire about “alarm features” as it may identify those at risk for organic disease and who require additional diagnostic workup. We developed a computer algorithm called Automated Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Symptoms (AEGIS) that systematically collects patient gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and alarm features, and then “translates” the information into a history of present illness (HPI). Our study's objective was to compare the number of alarms documented by physicians during usual care vs. that collected by AEGIS. Methods We performed a cross-sectional study with a paired sample design among patients visiting adult GI clinics. Participants first received usual care by their physicians and then completed AEGIS. Each individual thus contributed both a physician-documented and computer-generated HPI. Blinded physician reviewers enumerated the positive alarm features (hematochezia, melena, hematemesis, unintentional weight loss, decreased appetite, and fevers) mentioned in each HPI. We compared the number of documented alarms within patient using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results Seventy-five patients had both physician and AEGIS HPIs. AEGIS identified more patients with positive alarm features compared to physicians (53% vs. 27%; p < .001). AEGIS also documented more positive alarms (median 1, interquartile range [IQR] 0–2) vs. physicians (median 0, IQR 0–1; p < .001). Moreover, clinicians documented only 30% of the positive alarms self-reported by patients through AEGIS. Conclusions Physicians documented less than one-third of red flags reported by patients through a computer algorithm. These data indicate that physicians may under report alarm features and that computerized “checklists” could complement standard HPIs to bolster clinical care.

Prevalence of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Proton Pump Inhibitor-Refractory Symptoms

“…Another strength is our use of a novel online digital health tool that uses validated NIH PROMIS item banks and GERD-specific questions to systematically gather comprehensive information from respondents. 16,19,49 This digital platform also allowed us to efficiently recruit a large, highly diverse, representative population in a very short period of time.…”

Burden of Gastrointestinal Symptoms in the United States: Results of a Nationally Representative Survey of Over 71,000 Americans

“…Another strength is use of a novel online digital health tool that employed validated NIH PROMIS questionnaires and computerized adaptive testing to systematically gather comprehensive GI symptom information from respondents. (21, 27, 28) This allowed us to efficiently gather data from a very large cross-section of the general U.S. population; we recruited over 71,000 respondents in the span of three weeks. Moreover, leveraging an online platform is less resource intensive compared to other population-based surveys that require significant investments in infrastructure and personnel to conduct household and telephone interviews.…”

Impact of National Institutes of Health Gastrointestinal PROMIS Measures in Clinical Practice: Results of a Multicenter Controlled Trial

“…Patients were guided through a set of questions measuring the timing, severity, frequency, location, quality, and character of each reported GI PROMIS symptom, along with relevant comorbidities, family history, and alarm features. (19, 20) Once the questions were completed, the information was transformed into a full narrative GI HPI that accompanied the PROMIS heat map (Figure 1). In a previous head-to-head trial comparing GI PROMIS-directed computerized HPIs vs. physician HPIs, we found that the computerized HPIs were rated by blinded reviewers to be of higher quality and more thorough, complete, succinct, and relevant.…”