Search

Introduction: In recent years, reinforcement learning (RL) has gained traction in the healthcare domain. In particular, RL methods have been explored for haemodynamic optimization of septic patients in the Intensive Care Unit. Most hospitals however, lack the data and expertise for model development, necessitating transfer of models developed using external datasets. This approach assumes model generalizability across different patient populations, the validity of which has not previously been tested. In addition, there is limited knowledge on safety and reliability. These challenges need to be addressed to further facilitate implementation of RL models in clinical practice.Method: We developed and validated a new reinforcement learning model for hemodynamic optimization in sepsis on the MIMIC intensive care database from the USA using a dueling double deep Q network. We then transferred this model to the European AmsterdamUMCdb intensive care database. T-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were used to explore the differences between the patient populations. We apply off-policy policy evaluation methods to quantify model performance. In addition, we introduce and apply a novel deep policy inspection to analyse how the optimal policy relates to the different phases of sepsis and sepsis treatment to provide interpretable insight in order to assess model safety and reliability.Results: The off-policy evaluation revealed that the optimal policy outperformed the physician policy on both datasets despite marked differences between the two patient populations and physician's policies. Our novel deep policy inspection method showed insightful results and unveiled that the model could initiate therapy adequately and adjust therapy intensity to illness severity and disease progression which indicated safe and reliable model behaviour. Compared to current physician behavior, the developed policy prefers a more liberal use of vasopressors with a more restrained use of fluid therapy in line with previous work.Conclusion: We created a reinforcement learning model for optimal bedside hemodynamic management and demonstrated model transferability between populations from the USA and Europe for the first time. We proposed new methods for deep policy inspection integrating expert domain knowledge. This is expected to facilitate progression to bedside clinical decision support for the treatment of critically ill patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) play an important role in the management of older people receiving homecare. However, little is known about how often specific NPIs are being used and to what extent usage varies between countries. The aim of the current study was to investigate the prevalence of NPIs in older homecare recipients in six European countries., Methods: This is a cross-sectional study of older homecare recipients (65+) using baseline data from the longitudinal cohort study 'Identifying best practices for care-dependent elderly by Benchmarking Costs and outcomes of community care' (IBenC). The analyzed NPIs are based on the interRAI Home Care instrument, a comprehensive geriatric assessment instrument. The prevalence of 24 NPIs was analyzed in Belgium, Germany, Finland, Iceland, Italy and the Netherlands. NPIs from seven groups were considered: psychosocial interventions, physical activity, regular care interventions, special therapies, preventive measures, special aids and environmental interventions., Results: A total of 2884 homecare recipients were included. The mean age at baseline was 82.9 years and of all participants, 66.9% were female. The intervention with the highest prevalence in the study sample was 'emergency assistance available' (74%). Two other highly prevalent interventions were 'physical activity' (69%) and 'home nurse' (62%). Large differences between countries in the use of NPIs were observed and included, for example, 'going outside' (range 7-82%), 'home health aids' (range 12-93%), and 'physician visit' (range 24-94%)., Conclusions: The use of NPIs varied considerably between homecare users in different European countries. It is important to better understand the barriers and facilitators of use of these potentially beneficial interventions in order to design successful uptake strategies., (© 2023. The Author(s).)