Objective: To assess primary care physicians' (PCPs) perception of the need for serious illness conversations (SIC) or other palliative care interventions in patients flagged by a machine learning tool for high one-year mortality risk.
Materials and methods: We surveyed PCPs from four Brigham and Women's Hospital primary care practice sites. Multiple mortality prediction algorithms were ensembled to assess adult patients of these PCPs who were either enrolled in the hospital's integrated care management program or had one of several chronic conditions. The patients were classified as high or low-risk of one-year mortality. A blinded survey had PCPs evaluate these patients for palliative care needs. We measured PCP and machine learning tool agreement regarding patients' need for an SIC/elevated risk of mortality.
Results: Of 66 PCPs, 20 (30.3%) participated in the survey. Out of 312 patients evaluated, 60.6% were female, with a mean (SD) age of 69.3 (17.5) years, and a mean (SD) Charlson comorbidity index of 2.80 (2.89). The machine learning tool identified 162 (51.9%) patients as high-risk. Excluding deceased or unfamiliar patients, PCPs felt that an SIC was appropriate for 179 patients; the machine learning tool flagged 123 of these patients as high-risk (68.7% concordance). For 105 patients whom PCPs deemed SIC-unnecessary, the tool classified 83 as low-risk (79.1% concordance). There was substantial agreement between PCPs and the tool (Gwet's agreement coefficient of 0.640).
Conclusions and relevance: A machine learning mortality prediction tool offers promise as a clinical decision aid, helping clinicians pinpoint patients needing palliative care interventions.
Thieme. All rights reserved.