PERFEX , for automatic interpretation of Cardiac SPECT data. This system infers the extent and severity of coronary artery disease (CAD) from perfusion distributions, and provides as output a patient report summarizing the condition of the three main arteries and other pertinent information. The work on this project has been done in collaboration with Emory University Hospital.
Around 300 questions could be asked of the patient; however, the system guides the nurse to ask 20 to 40 questions relevant to a particular patient. The progress note, organized in the SOAP format, is reviewed by the physician with the patient. The physician could also review the clinical data, weigh the suggestions from the system, and modify the Assessment or Plan sections. The Subjective and Objective sections could also be modified but rarely needed to be. Without the system a physician spent 21.35 min (+/- 0.95 sem, N=140) with the patient. With the system, the nurse spent 14.95 min (+/- 0.81 sem, N=27), and the physician spent 7.4 min (+/- 0.68 sem, N=27). Physician time was cut by about 66%. Using 1994 VA salaries for nurses and physicians, we have shown that the system reduced cost by about 40%.
We have compared the quality of the progress note generated by physicians to the computer generated note. Using a scoring system that divides the note data into essential and bonus categories, we found that the computer note quality was higher (95.5, +/-8.19 sd, N=12) compared to a physician's hand written note ( 85.2, +/-9.11 sd, N=24; p < 0.01).
Our informal assessment of the system is that it was well accepted by our physicians, nurses, and patients. Our physicians were willing to give up time on routine cases in exchange for more time on more difficult cases. Nurses liked the system because they could work at a higher level of expertise and spend more time with the patient. Patients seemed willing to accept the system even though they were waiting for two interviews (nurse and physician).
The system uses an object-oriented architecture and is divided into modules which contain both rules and data, and communicate with each other by passing conclusions. We organized the objects by physiological system. The system runs on a PC under Windows 3.11 and was constructed using ToolBook (Asymetric) for the user interface, Nexpert Object (Neuron Data) for the inferencing engine, and DBase III (Borland) for data storage. The system contained about 25 screens, 250 rules, and 300 data fields in about 30 files.
Doller, H. J., Hostetler, W.E., Krishnamurthy, K., and Peterson, L.L., Epileptologists' Assistant: A Cost Effective Expert System, SCAMC 17:384-388, 1994.
Doller, H. J., Hostetler, W. E., and Peterson, L. L.: Expert Systems Decrease the Cost While Increasing the Quality of Out Patient Clinical Encounters AMIA 1995 Spring Congress, Cambridge, MA, June 24-28, 1995.
Doller, H. J., Hostetler, W., Krishnamurthy, K., and Peterson, L.L.: Expert Systems: Cost Effective Patient Data Gathering Tools for the Electronic Medical Record. AAAI Spring Symposium, St Louis, May 9-15, 1993.
Hostetler, W.E. and Doller, H. J.: Epileptologists' Assistant: an Expert System for Epilepsy Clinic Improves Progress Note Quality While Decreasing Visit Cost, Epilepsia 35:(supp. 8) 45, 1994.
Hostetler, W., Doller, H. J., Krishnamurthy, K., and Peterson, L.L.: Epileptologist's Assistant: A Cost Effective Expert System for Clinical Medicine. First World Conference on Computational Medicine, Public Health and Biotechnology, Austin, Texas., April 24-26, 1994.
Hostetler, W., Krishnamurthy, K., Peterson, L.L., and Doller, H. J., The Physician's Interface to Epileptologist's Assistant - A Cost Effective Expert System, SCAMC 17:944, 1994.
We have built an expert system and a knowledge acqusition component which is routinely applied to more than 200 prototypical descriptions of dysmorphic syndromes. Prototypes consist of simple feature lists. The catalogue of features has 823 entries. The patient data management component of the system supports the handling of all clinical data.
We evaluated our approach using 903 patients and 229 different prototypes of dysmorphic syndrome which have been collected over many years in a pediatric clinic at the University of Munich. As a result we observed good sensitivity for the system, comparable decisions to the involved physicians and more precise and enhanced knowledge on dysmorphic syndromes. One of the major advantages of case-based systems is that the semi-automatically and incrementally generated prototypes are highly site-specific i.e. are adapted to the set of diseases specific for the patients seen in this pediatric clinic.
Up to now the system has been used on about 3000 patients. All knowledge about these patients is integrated into the knowledge-base. Up to three physicians have been used MDDB since 1988 daily.
The program was designed and written through joint cooperation between the Department of Engineering Mathematics and the Department of Child Dental Health, University of Bristol. Development was funded by an MRC Grant.
Whilst the mechanical side of treatment is relatively straightforward, success depends upon adopting an appropriate treatment plan. Studies have shown that less that half the treatment plans adopted by practitioners are ideal and this considerably compromises the standard of result which is obtained. Jeremiah has been shown to improve on the ability of practitioners to select cases for suitable for treatment with removable orthodontic appliances and to identify those requiring referral for more specialised treatment.
Mackin N, Stephens CD, (1997). Development and testing of a fuzzy expert system - an example in orthodontics in proceedings of fuzzy logic: applications and future directions, pp61-71. Unicom Seminars Ltd, Uxbridge, Middlesex.
Richmond S, Shaw WC, Stephens CD, O'Brien KD, Brooke PH, Roberts C, Andrews M, (1993) Orthodontics in the General Dental Service of England and Wales: a critical assessment of standards. British Dental Journal, 174: 315-329.
Sims-Williams JH, Brown ID, Matthewman A, Stephens CD, (1987) A computer controlled expert system for orthodontic advice. British Dental Journal, 163: 161-169.
Sims-Williams JH, Mackin N, Stephens CD, (1994) Lessons learnt from the development of an orthodontic expert system in Neural networks in medicine and healthcare. Ifeachor CD, Rosen KG (eds), pp410-414, University of Plymouth.
Stephens CD, Drage KD, Richmond S, Shaw WC, Roberts CT, Andrews M, (1993). Consultant opinion on orthodontic treatment plans devised by dental practitioners: a pilot study. Journal of Dentistry, 21: 355-359.
Stephens CD Mackin N, Sims-Williams JH, (1996) The development and validation of an orthodontic expert system. British Journal of Orthodontics, 23: 1-9.
Orthoplanner was developed by cooperation between the Department of Engineering Mathmatics and Department of Child Dental Health, University of Bristol and Team Management Systems, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, with support from 2 SMART Awards (Small Firms Merit Award for Research and Technology).
Orthoplanner is a Windows based program. It uses a number of techniques including rulebase reading, but forward and backward chaining and fuzzy logic based representations of orthodontic knowledge (Mackin 1992). Extensive use is made of interactive graphics to input clinical data. In addition to treatment planning advice, the program provides extensive clinical support including instructions to patients, pre-formed letters and a 200 page hypertext manual with 1000 supporting references.
Mackin N, (1992). The development of an expert system for planning orthodontic treatment. PhD Thesis, University of Bristol.
Stephens CD, Mackin N, (1998). The validation of an orthodontic expert system rulebase for fixed appliance treatment planning. European Journal of Orthodontics (accepted for publication).