Cargando…

33 Setting the Standard: Using a National Burn Registry to Benchmark Risk Adjusted Mortality

INTRODUCTION: Reports of single center experience and studies of larger databases have identified several predictors of burn center mortality, including age, burn size, and inhalation injury. None of these analyses has been broad enough to allow benchmarking across burn centers. The purpose of this...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mandell, Samuel P, Higginson, Sara, Hoarle, Kimberly, Hsu, Naiwei, Pardon, Darryl A, Phillips, Bart D, Phillips, Matthew H, Thompson, Callie M, Weber, Joan M, Bessey, Palmer Q
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8945409/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/irac012.036
_version_ 1784673951525371904
author Mandell, Samuel P
Higginson, Sara
Hoarle, Kimberly
Hsu, Naiwei
Pardon, Darryl A
Phillips, Bart D
Phillips, Matthew H
Thompson, Callie M
Weber, Joan M
Bessey, Palmer Q
author_facet Mandell, Samuel P
Higginson, Sara
Hoarle, Kimberly
Hsu, Naiwei
Pardon, Darryl A
Phillips, Bart D
Phillips, Matthew H
Thompson, Callie M
Weber, Joan M
Bessey, Palmer Q
author_sort Mandell, Samuel P
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Reports of single center experience and studies of larger databases have identified several predictors of burn center mortality, including age, burn size, and inhalation injury. None of these analyses has been broad enough to allow benchmarking across burn centers. The purpose of this study was to derive a reliable risk-adjusted, statistical model of mortality based on real-life experience at many of the burn centers in the United States. METHODS: We used a national burn registry to identify 128,252 initial admissions from July 2015 through June 2020 across 103 unique burn centers. We selected 23 predictor variables, from over 50 recorded in the dataset based on completeness (at least 75% complete required) and clinical significance. Missing data were multiply imputed with a Bayesian Ridge Regression estimator. All data analysis was performed in Python using Numpy and Scikit-Learn libraries. We used Gradient boosted regression (CatBoost), a form of machine learning, to predict mortality and compared this to traditional logistic regression. Model performance was evaluated with AUC and PR curves. Using the CatBoost predictions, observe to expected mortality was calculated for each center. Confidence intervals for O/E analysis in the case of mortality prediction were calculated using a custom implementation of the Clopper-Pearson method. Analyses were run on three cohorts: All patients; Patients with 10-20% TBSA; and >20% TBSA. RESULTS: The CatBoost model achieved a test AUC of 0.982 with an average precision of 0.801. The logistic regression, by comparison, produced an AUC of 0.974 with an average precision of 0.726. While accuracy, the measure most reported in the literature, is near ceiling for both models, the CatBoost model is markedly more sensitive, leading to a substantial improvement in average precision. Because of the superiority of the CatBoost model with respect to outcome prediction, we only used CatBoost models for calculation of O/E ratio (Fig. 1). CONCLUSIONS: Gradient boosted regression models provided greater model performance than traditional, multivariate, logistic regression. Using data from a national burn registry, we can predict burn mortality across contributing centers allowing for meaningful O/E ratios. Further, this allows for comparison of mortality across centers contributing data to the registry.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8945409
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89454092022-03-28 33 Setting the Standard: Using a National Burn Registry to Benchmark Risk Adjusted Mortality Mandell, Samuel P Higginson, Sara Hoarle, Kimberly Hsu, Naiwei Pardon, Darryl A Phillips, Bart D Phillips, Matthew H Thompson, Callie M Weber, Joan M Bessey, Palmer Q J Burn Care Res Correlative V: Quality Improvement INTRODUCTION: Reports of single center experience and studies of larger databases have identified several predictors of burn center mortality, including age, burn size, and inhalation injury. None of these analyses has been broad enough to allow benchmarking across burn centers. The purpose of this study was to derive a reliable risk-adjusted, statistical model of mortality based on real-life experience at many of the burn centers in the United States. METHODS: We used a national burn registry to identify 128,252 initial admissions from July 2015 through June 2020 across 103 unique burn centers. We selected 23 predictor variables, from over 50 recorded in the dataset based on completeness (at least 75% complete required) and clinical significance. Missing data were multiply imputed with a Bayesian Ridge Regression estimator. All data analysis was performed in Python using Numpy and Scikit-Learn libraries. We used Gradient boosted regression (CatBoost), a form of machine learning, to predict mortality and compared this to traditional logistic regression. Model performance was evaluated with AUC and PR curves. Using the CatBoost predictions, observe to expected mortality was calculated for each center. Confidence intervals for O/E analysis in the case of mortality prediction were calculated using a custom implementation of the Clopper-Pearson method. Analyses were run on three cohorts: All patients; Patients with 10-20% TBSA; and >20% TBSA. RESULTS: The CatBoost model achieved a test AUC of 0.982 with an average precision of 0.801. The logistic regression, by comparison, produced an AUC of 0.974 with an average precision of 0.726. While accuracy, the measure most reported in the literature, is near ceiling for both models, the CatBoost model is markedly more sensitive, leading to a substantial improvement in average precision. Because of the superiority of the CatBoost model with respect to outcome prediction, we only used CatBoost models for calculation of O/E ratio (Fig. 1). CONCLUSIONS: Gradient boosted regression models provided greater model performance than traditional, multivariate, logistic regression. Using data from a national burn registry, we can predict burn mortality across contributing centers allowing for meaningful O/E ratios. Further, this allows for comparison of mortality across centers contributing data to the registry. Oxford University Press 2022-03-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8945409/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/irac012.036 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Burn Association. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Correlative V: Quality Improvement
Mandell, Samuel P
Higginson, Sara
Hoarle, Kimberly
Hsu, Naiwei
Pardon, Darryl A
Phillips, Bart D
Phillips, Matthew H
Thompson, Callie M
Weber, Joan M
Bessey, Palmer Q
33 Setting the Standard: Using a National Burn Registry to Benchmark Risk Adjusted Mortality
title 33 Setting the Standard: Using a National Burn Registry to Benchmark Risk Adjusted Mortality
title_full 33 Setting the Standard: Using a National Burn Registry to Benchmark Risk Adjusted Mortality
title_fullStr 33 Setting the Standard: Using a National Burn Registry to Benchmark Risk Adjusted Mortality
title_full_unstemmed 33 Setting the Standard: Using a National Burn Registry to Benchmark Risk Adjusted Mortality
title_short 33 Setting the Standard: Using a National Burn Registry to Benchmark Risk Adjusted Mortality
title_sort 33 setting the standard: using a national burn registry to benchmark risk adjusted mortality
topic Correlative V: Quality Improvement
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8945409/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/irac012.036
work_keys_str_mv AT mandellsamuelp 33settingthestandardusinganationalburnregistrytobenchmarkriskadjustedmortality
AT higginsonsara 33settingthestandardusinganationalburnregistrytobenchmarkriskadjustedmortality
AT hoarlekimberly 33settingthestandardusinganationalburnregistrytobenchmarkriskadjustedmortality
AT hsunaiwei 33settingthestandardusinganationalburnregistrytobenchmarkriskadjustedmortality
AT pardondarryla 33settingthestandardusinganationalburnregistrytobenchmarkriskadjustedmortality
AT phillipsbartd 33settingthestandardusinganationalburnregistrytobenchmarkriskadjustedmortality
AT phillipsmatthewh 33settingthestandardusinganationalburnregistrytobenchmarkriskadjustedmortality
AT thompsoncalliem 33settingthestandardusinganationalburnregistrytobenchmarkriskadjustedmortality
AT weberjoanm 33settingthestandardusinganationalburnregistrytobenchmarkriskadjustedmortality
AT besseypalmerq 33settingthestandardusinganationalburnregistrytobenchmarkriskadjustedmortality