Searched for: in-biosketch:true
person:szerea01
Large Language Model-Based Responses to Patients' In-Basket Messages
Small, William R; Wiesenfeld, Batia; Brandfield-Harvey, Beatrix; Jonassen, Zoe; Mandal, Soumik; Stevens, Elizabeth R; Major, Vincent J; Lostraglio, Erin; Szerencsy, Adam; Jones, Simon; Aphinyanaphongs, Yindalon; Johnson, Stephen B; Nov, Oded; Mann, Devin
IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Virtual patient-physician communications have increased since 2020 and negatively impacted primary care physician (PCP) well-being. Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) drafts of patient messages could potentially reduce health care professional (HCP) workload and improve communication quality, but only if the drafts are considered useful. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:To assess PCPs' perceptions of GenAI drafts and to examine linguistic characteristics associated with equity and perceived empathy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:This cross-sectional quality improvement study tested the hypothesis that PCPs' ratings of GenAI drafts (created using the electronic health record [EHR] standard prompts) would be equivalent to HCP-generated responses on 3 dimensions. The study was conducted at NYU Langone Health using private patient-HCP communications at 3 internal medicine practices piloting GenAI. EXPOSURES/UNASSIGNED:Randomly assigned patient messages coupled with either an HCP message or the draft GenAI response. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:PCPs rated responses' information content quality (eg, relevance), using a Likert scale, communication quality (eg, verbosity), using a Likert scale, and whether they would use the draft or start anew (usable vs unusable). Branching logic further probed for empathy, personalization, and professionalism of responses. Computational linguistics methods assessed content differences in HCP vs GenAI responses, focusing on equity and empathy. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:A total of 16 PCPs (8 [50.0%] female) reviewed 344 messages (175 GenAI drafted; 169 HCP drafted). Both GenAI and HCP responses were rated favorably. GenAI responses were rated higher for communication style than HCP responses (mean [SD], 3.70 [1.15] vs 3.38 [1.20]; P = .01, U = 12 568.5) but were similar to HCPs on information content (mean [SD], 3.53 [1.26] vs 3.41 [1.27]; P = .37; U = 13 981.0) and usable draft proportion (mean [SD], 0.69 [0.48] vs 0.65 [0.47], P = .49, t = -0.6842). Usable GenAI responses were considered more empathetic than usable HCP responses (32 of 86 [37.2%] vs 13 of 79 [16.5%]; difference, 125.5%), possibly attributable to more subjective (mean [SD], 0.54 [0.16] vs 0.31 [0.23]; P < .001; difference, 74.2%) and positive (mean [SD] polarity, 0.21 [0.14] vs 0.13 [0.25]; P = .02; difference, 61.5%) language; they were also numerically longer (mean [SD] word count, 90.5 [32.0] vs 65.4 [62.6]; difference, 38.4%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .07) and more linguistically complex (mean [SD] score, 125.2 [47.8] vs 95.4 [58.8]; P = .002; difference, 31.2%). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:In this cross-sectional study of PCP perceptions of an EHR-integrated GenAI chatbot, GenAI was found to communicate information better and with more empathy than HCPs, highlighting its potential to enhance patient-HCP communication. However, GenAI drafts were less readable than HCPs', a significant concern for patients with low health or English literacy.
PMCID:11252893
PMID: 39012633
ISSN: 2574-3805
CID: 5686582
Development and evaluation of an artificial intelligence-based workflow for the prioritization of patient portal messages
Yang, Jie; So, Jonathan; Zhang, Hao; Jones, Simon; Connolly, Denise M; Golding, Claudia; Griffes, Esmelin; Szerencsy, Adam C; Wu, Tzer Jason; Aphinyanaphongs, Yindalon; Major, Vincent J
OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:Accelerating demand for patient messaging has impacted the practice of many providers. Messages are not recommended for urgent medical issues, but some do require rapid attention. This presents an opportunity for artificial intelligence (AI) methods to prioritize review of messages. Our study aimed to highlight some patient portal messages for prioritized review using a custom AI system integrated into the electronic health record (EHR). MATERIALS AND METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We developed a Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT)-based large language model using 40 132 patient-sent messages to identify patterns involving high acuity topics that warrant an immediate callback. The model was then implemented into 2 shared pools of patient messages managed by dozens of registered nurses. A primary outcome, such as the time before messages were read, was evaluated with a difference-in-difference methodology. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = 396 466), an improvement exceeding the trend was observed in the time high-scoring messages sit unread (21 minutes, 63 vs 42 for messages sent outside business hours). DISCUSSION/UNASSIGNED:Our work shows great promise in improving care when AI is aligned with human workflow. Future work involves audience expansion, aiding users with suggested actions, and drafting responses. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Many patients utilize patient portal messages, and while most messages are routine, a small fraction describe alarming symptoms. Our AI-based workflow shortens the turnaround time to get a trained clinician to review these messages to provide safer, higher-quality care.
PMCID:11328532
PMID: 39156046
ISSN: 2574-2531
CID: 5680362
A Dynamic Clinical Decision Support Tool to Improve Primary Care Outcomes in a High-Volume, Low-Resource Setting
Dapkins, Isaac; Prescott, Rasheda; Ladino, Nathalia; Anderman, Judd; McCaleb, Chase; Colella, Doreen; Gore, Radhika; Fontil, Valy; Szerencsy, Adam; Blecker, Saul
The Family Health Centers at New York University Langone (FHC), a federally qualified health center network in New York City, created a novel clinical decision support (CDS) tool that alerts primary health care providers to patients"™ gaps in care and triggers a dynamic, individualized order set on the basis of unique patient factors, enabling providers to readily act on each patient"™s specific gaps in care. FHC implemented this tool in 2017, starting with 15 protocols for quality measures; as of February 2024, there are 30 such protocols. During a patient visit with a provider, when there is a gap in care, a best-practice alert (BPA) fires, which includes an order set unique to the patient and visit. The provider can bypass the alert (not open it) or acknowledge the alert (open it). The provider may review the content of the order set and accept it as is or with modifications, or they can decline its recommendations if they believe it is not appropriate or plan to address the gap in care another way during the visit. To accept the dynamic order set is the intended workflow. The authors present data from September 2019 to January 2023 totaling 171,319 patient visits with at least one open gap in care among providers in pediatrics, family medicine, and internal medicine. The rate at which providers acknowledged the BPA in the first 6 months was 45% and steadily increased. In the last 6 months of the period, providers acknowledged the BPA 78% (19,281 of 24,575) of the time. Similarly, in the first 6 months, in all encounters in which a BPA was fired, 28.8% (8,585 of 29,829) had an order placed via the dynamic order set (accepted); that rate increased to 49.7% (12,210 of 24,575) during the last 6 months. This order set completion rate is notable given that most CDS use rates are low. Gap closure was higher when providers acknowledged the alert. In an analysis of all encounters with at least one open gap, spanning 2019"“2023, 46% (48,431 of 105,371) of the time, at least one gap was closed when the alert was acknowledged compared with 33% (21,993 of 65,948) when the alert was bypassed (and the recommendations of the dynamic order set were never followed). The authors show that CDS tools can be successfully implemented in a high-volume, low-resource setting if designed with efficiency in mind, ensuring provider utilization and clinical impact through closing care gaps. CDS tools that are dynamically patient specific can help improve quality of care if they are part of a broader culture of quality improvement.
SCOPUS:85190307342
ISSN: 2642-0007
CID: 5670482
Quantifying the impact of telemedicine and patient medical advice request messages on physicians' work-outside-work
Mandal, Soumik; Wiesenfeld, Batia M; Mann, Devin M; Szerencsy, Adam C; Iturrate, Eduardo; Nov, Oded
The COVID-19 pandemic has boosted digital health utilization, raising concerns about increased physicians' after-hours clinical work ("work-outside-work"). The surge in patients' digital messages and additional time spent on work-outside-work by telemedicine providers underscores the need to evaluate the connection between digital health utilization and physicians' after-hours commitments. We examined the impact on physicians' workload from two types of digital demands - patients' messages requesting medical advice (PMARs) sent to physicians' inbox (inbasket), and telemedicine. Our study included 1716 ambulatory-care physicians in New York City regularly practicing between November 2022 and March 2023. Regression analyses assessed primary and interaction effects of (PMARs) and telemedicine on work-outside-work. The study revealed a significant effect of PMARs on physicians' work-outside-work and that this relationship is moderated by physicians' specialties. Non-primary care physicians or specialists experienced a more pronounced effect than their primary care peers. Analysis of their telemedicine load revealed that primary care physicians received fewer PMARs and spent less time in work-outside-work with more telemedicine. Specialists faced increased PMARs and did more work-outside-work as telemedicine visits increased which could be due to the difference in patient panels. Reducing PMAR volumes and efficient inbasket management strategies needed to reduce physicians' work-outside-work. Policymakers need to be cognizant of potential disruptions in physicians carefully balanced workload caused by the digital health services.
PMCID:10867011
PMID: 38355913
ISSN: 2398-6352
CID: 5635802
Implementing a Clinical Decision Support Tool to Improve Physical Activity
McCarthy, Margaret M; Szerencsy, Adam; Taza-Rocano, Leslie; Hopkins, Stephanie; Mann, Devin; D'Eramo Melkus, Gail; Vorderstrasse, Allison; Katz, Stuart D
BACKGROUND:Currently, only about half of U.S. adults achieve current physical activity guidelines. Routine physical activity is not regularly assessed, nor are patients routinely counseled by their health care provider on achieving recommended levels. The three-question physical activity vital sign (PAVS) was developed to assess physical activity duration and intensity and identify adults not meeting physical activity guidelines. Clinical decision support provided via a best practice advisory in an electronic health record (EHR) system can be triggered as a prompt, reminding health care providers to implement the best practice intervention when appropriate. Remote patient monitoring of physical activity can provide objective data in the EHR. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and clinical utility of embedding the PAVS and a triggered best practice advisor into the EHR in an ambulatory preventive cardiology practice setting to alert providers to patients reporting low physical activity and prompt health care providers to counsel these patients as needed. METHODS:Three components based in the EHR were integrated for the purpose of this study: patients completed the PAVS through their electronic patient portal prior to an office visit; a best practice advisory was created to prompt providers to counsel patients who reported low levels of physical activity; and remote patient monitoring via Fitbit synced to the EHR provided objective physical activity data. The intervention was pilot-tested in the Epic EHR for 1 year (July 1, 2021-June 30, 2022). Qualitative feedback on the intervention from both providers and patients was obtained at the completion of the study. RESULTS:Monthly assessments of the use of the PAVS and best practice advisory and remote patient monitoring were completed. Patients' completion of the PAVS varied from 35% to 48% per month. The best practice advisory was signed by providers between 2% and 65% and was acknowledged by 2% to 22% per month. The majority (58%) of patients were able to sync a Fitbit device to their EHR for remote monitoring. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Although uptake of each component needs improvement, this pilot demonstrated the feasibility of incorporating a PA promotion intervention into the EHR. Qualitative feedback provided guidance for future implementation.
PMID: 38207172
ISSN: 1538-9847
CID: 5631332
Impact of Visit Volume on the Effectiveness of Electronic Tools to Improve Heart Failure Care
Mukhopadhyay, Amrita; Reynolds, Harmony R; King, William C; Phillips, Lawrence M; Nagler, Arielle R; Szerencsy, Adam; Saxena, Archana; Klapheke, Nathan; Katz, Stuart D; Horwitz, Leora I; Blecker, Saul
BACKGROUND:Electronic health record (EHR) tools can improve prescribing of guideline-recommended therapies for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but their effectiveness may vary by physician workload. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This paper aims to assess whether physician workload modifies the effectiveness of EHR tools for HFrEF. METHODS:This was a prespecified subgroup analysis of the BETTER CARE-HF (Building Electronic Tools to Enhance and Reinforce Cardiovascular Recommendations for Heart Failure) cluster-randomized trial, which compared effectiveness of an alert vs message vs usual care on prescribing of mineralocorticoid antagonists (MRAs). The trial included adults with HFrEF seen in cardiology offices who were eligible for and not prescribed MRAs. Visit volume was defined at the cardiologist-level as number of visits per 6-month study period (high = upper tertile vs non-high = remaining). Analysis at the patient-level used likelihood ratio test for interaction with log-binomial models. RESULTS:Among 2,211 patients seen by 174 cardiologists, 932 (42.2%) were seen by high-volume cardiologists (median: 1,853; Q1-Q3: 1,637-2,225 visits/6 mo; and median: 10; Q1-Q3: 9-12 visits/half-day). MRA was prescribed to 5.5% in the high-volume vs 14.8% in the non-high-volume groups in the usual care arm, 10.3% vs 19.6% in the message arm, and 31.2% vs 28.2% in the alert arm, respectively. Visit volume modified treatment effect (P for interaction = 0.02) such that the alert was more effective in the high-volume group (relative risk: 5.16; 95% CI: 2.57-10.4) than the non-high-volume group (relative risk: 1.93; 95% CI: 1.29-2.90). CONCLUSIONS:An EHR-embedded alert increased prescribing by >5-fold among patients seen by high-volume cardiologists. Our findings support use of EHR alerts, especially in busy practice settings. (Building Electronic Tools to Enhance and Reinforce Cardiovascular Recommendations for Heart Failure [BETTER CARE-HF]; NCT05275920).
PMID: 38043045
ISSN: 2213-1787
CID: 5597482
Cluster-Randomized Trial Comparing Ambulatory Decision Support Tools to Improve Heart Failure Care
Mukhopadhyay, Amrita; Reynolds, Harmony R; Phillips, Lawrence M; Nagler, Arielle R; King, William C; Szerencsy, Adam; Saxena, Archana; Aminian, Rod; Klapheke, Nathan; Horwitz, Leora I; Katz, Stuart D; Blecker, Saul
BACKGROUND:Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) are under-prescribed for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). OBJECTIVE:To compare effectiveness of two automated, electronic health record (EHR)-embedded tools vs. usual care on MRA prescribing in eligible patients with HFrEF. METHODS:BETTER CARE-HF (Building Electronic Tools To Enhance and Reinforce CArdiovascular REcommendations for Heart Failure) was a three-arm, pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial comparing the effectiveness of an alert during individual patient encounters vs. a message about multiple patients between encounters vs. usual care on MRA prescribing. We included adult patients with HFrEF, no active MRA prescription, no contraindication to MRA, and an outpatient cardiologist in a large health system. Patients were cluster-randomized by cardiologist (60 per arm). RESULTS:The study included 2,211 patients (alert: 755, message: 812, usual care [control]: 644), with average age 72.2 years, average EF 33%, who were predominantly male (71.4%) and White (68.9%). New MRA prescribing occurred in 29.6% of patients in the alert arm, 15.6% in the message arm, and 11.7% in the control arm. The alert more than doubled MRA prescribing compared to control (RR: 2.53, 95% CI: 1.77-3.62, p<0.0001), and improved MRA prescribing compared to the message (RR: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.21-2.29, p=0.002). The number of patients with alert needed to result in an additional MRA prescription was 5.6. CONCLUSIONS:An automated, patient-specific, EHR-embedded alert increased MRA prescribing compared to both a message and usual care. Our findings highlight the potential for EHR-embedded tools to substantially increase prescription of life-saving therapies for HFrEF. (NCT05275920).
PMID: 36882134
ISSN: 1558-3597
CID: 5430312
Design and pilot implementation for the BETTER CARE-HF trial: A pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial comparing two targeted approaches to ambulatory clinical decision support for cardiologists
Mukhopadhyay, Amrita; Reynolds, Harmony R; Xia, Yuhe; Phillips, Lawrence M; Aminian, Rod; Diah, Ruth-Ann; Nagler, Arielle R; Szerencsy, Adam; Saxena, Archana; Horwitz, Leora I; Katz, Stuart D; Blecker, Saul
BACKGROUND:Beart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. However, shortfalls in prescribing of proven therapies, particularly mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) therapy, account for several thousand preventable deaths per year nationwide. Electronic clinical decision support (CDS) is a potential low-cost and scalable solution to improve prescribing of therapies. However, the optimal timing and format of CDS tools is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS/RESULTS:We developed two targeted CDS tools to inform cardiologists of gaps in MRA therapy for patients with HFrEF and without contraindication to MRA therapy: (1) an alert that notifies cardiologists at the time of patient visit, and (2) an automated electronic message that allows for review between visits. We designed these tools using an established CDS framework and findings from semistructured interviews with cardiologists. We then pilot tested both CDS tools (n = 596 patients) and further enhanced them based on additional semistructured interviews (n = 11 cardiologists). The message was modified to reduce the number of patients listed, include future visits, and list date of next visit. The alert was modified to improve noticeability, reduce extraneous information on guidelines, and include key information on contraindications. CONCLUSIONS:The BETTER CARE-HF (Building Electronic Tools to Enhance and Reinforce CArdiovascular REcommendations for Heart Failure) trial aims to compare the effectiveness of the alert vs. the automated message vs. usual care on the primary outcome of MRA prescribing. To our knowledge, no study has directly compared the efficacy of these two different types of electronic CDS interventions. If effective, our findings can be rapidly disseminated to improve morbidity and mortality for patients with HFrEF, and can also inform the development of future CDS interventions for other disease states. (Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05275920).
PMID: 36640860
ISSN: 1097-6744
CID: 5403312
Effects of Real-time Prescription Benefit Recommendations on Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial
Desai, Sunita M; Chen, Alan Z; Wang, Jiejie; Chung, Wei-Yi; Stadelman, Jay; Mahoney, Chris; Szerencsy, Adam; Anzisi, Lisa; Mehrotra, Ateev; Horwitz, Leora I
Importance/UNASSIGNED:Rising drug costs contribute to medication nonadherence and adverse health outcomes. Real-time prescription benefit (RTPB) systems present prescribers with patient-specific out-of-pocket cost estimates and recommend lower-cost, clinically appropriate alternatives at the point of prescribing. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To investigate whether RTPB recommendations lead to reduced patient out-of-pocket costs for medications. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:In this cluster randomized trial, medical practices in a large, urban academic health system were randomly assigned to RTPB recommendations from January 13 to July 31, 2021. Participants were adult patients receiving outpatient prescriptions during the study period. The analysis was limited to prescriptions for which RTPB could recommend an available alternative. Electronic health record data were used to analyze the intervention's effects on prescribing. Data analyses were performed from August 20, 2021, to June 8, 2022. Interventions/UNASSIGNED:When a prescription was initiated in the electronic health record, the RTPB system recommended available lower-cost, clinically appropriate alternatives for a different medication, length of prescription, and/or choice of pharmacy. The prescriber could select either the initiated order or one of the recommended options. Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:Patient out-of-pocket cost for a prescription. Secondary outcomes were whether a mail-order prescription and a 90-day supply were ordered. Results/UNASSIGNED:Of 867 757 outpatient prescriptions at randomized practices, 36 419 (4.2%) met the inclusion criteria of having an available alternative. Out-of-pocket costs were $39.90 for a 30-day supply in the intervention group and $67.80 for a 30-day supply in the control group. The intervention led to an adjusted 11.2%; (95% CI, -15.7% to -6.4%) reduction in out-of-pocket costs. Mail-order pharmacy use was 9.6% and 7.6% in the intervention and control groups, respectively (adjusted 1.9 percentage point increase; 95% CI, 0.9 to 3.0). Rates of 90-day supply were not different. In high-cost drug classes, the intervention reduced out-of-pocket costs by 38.9%; 95% CI, -47.6% to -28.7%. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:This cluster randomized clinical trial showed that RTPB recommendations led to lower patient out-of-pocket costs, with the largest savings occurring for high-cost medications. However, RTPB recommendations were made for only a small percentage of prescriptions. Trial Registration/UNASSIGNED:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04940988; American Economic Association Registry: AEARCTR-0006909.
PMID: 36094537
ISSN: 2168-6114
CID: 5332742
Implementing the physical activity vital sign in an academic preventive cardiology clinic
McCarthy, Margaret M; Fletcher, Jason; Heffron, Sean; Szerencsy, Adam; Mann, Devin; Vorderstrasse, Allison
The aims were to implement physical activity (PA) screening as part of the electronic kiosk check-in process in an adult preventive cardiology clinic and assess factors related to patients' self-reported PA. The 3-question physical activity vital sign (PAVS) was embedded in the Epic electronic medical record and included how many days, minutes and intensity (light, moderate, vigorous) of PA patients conducted on average. This is a data analysis of PAVS data over a 60-day period. We conducted multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with not meeting current PA recommendations. Over 60 days, a total of 1322 patients checked into the clinic using the kiosk and 72% (n = 951) completed the PAVS at the kiosk. The majority of those patients were male (58%) and White (71%) with a mean age of 64 ± 15 years. Of the 951 patients completing the PAVS, 10% reported no PA, 55% reported some PA, and 35% reported achieving at least 150 min moderate or 75 min vigorous PA/week. In the logistic model, females (AOR = 1.4, 95%CI: 1.002-1.8, p = .049) vs. males, being Black (AOR = 2.0, 95%CI: 1.04-3.7, p = .038) or 'Other' race (AOR = 1.5, 95%CI: 1.02-2.3, p = .035) vs. White, unknown or other types of relationships (AOR = 0.0.26, 95%CI: 0.10-0.68, p = .006) vs. being married/partnered, and those who were retired (AOR = 1.9, 95% CI: 1.4-2.8, p < .001) or unemployed (AOR = 2.2, 95%CI: 1.3-3.7, p = .002) vs. full-time workers were associated with not achieving recommended levels of PA. The PAVS is a feasible electronic tool for quickly assessing PA and may prompt providers to counsel on this CVD risk factor.
PMCID:8193127
PMID: 34150483
ISSN: 2211-3355
CID: 4936852