Predicting Readmissions for Elective Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in Adults using Machine Learning Algorithms
Author(s)
Talwar A1, Huang Y1, Lin Y1, Masurkar P2, Aparasu RR3
1University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA, 2University of Houston College of Pharmacy, Wylie, TX, USA, 3Pharmaceutical Health Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA
OBJECTIVES The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is focusing on readmission within 30-days after total joint replacements for cost and quality considerations. This study evaluated machine learning (ML) algorithms for predicting the risk of 30-day readmission following hip and knee arthroplasty procedures. METHODS This study used data from the 2016 Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD). Patients aged ³18 years with index admissions for elective primary Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) or Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) were identified using the ICD-10-PCS codes,as primary procedure code. Models were trained on randomly partitioned 50% of the data, and the remaining dataset was used for validation and testing to predict readmission within 30 days of hospital discharge. The down-sampling technique was used on the training data for class imbalance and model hyperparameters were tuned using the 10-fold cross-validation. This study applied three ML algorithms to predict readmission, namely Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO), Random forest (RF), and RuleFit. Model performance was evaluated using Area Under the Curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, and precision. RESULTS According to the NRD, there was a total of 417,211 patients with hospital admission for elective THA and TKA. Among these admissions, 14,208 (3.41%) patients were readmitted within 30 days of hospital discharge. The model performance from all algorithms was similar, with an AUC score of 0.61. The LASSO model had an accuracy of 0.66, while the RF model and RuleFit model had an accuracy of 0.65. The sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, and precision were also similar for three ML algorithms. CONCLUSIONS The three ML algorithms performed similarly based on the various model performances. The model performance measures should be carefully evaluated before applying these algorithms for evaluating the quality of care in hospitals.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2021-05, ISPOR 2021, Montreal, Canada
Value in Health, Volume 24, Issue 5, S1 (May 2021)
Code
PSU20
Topic
Health Service Delivery & Process of Care, Methodological & Statistical Research
Topic Subcategory
Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Predictive Analytics, Hospital and Clinical Practices, Quality of Care Measurement
Disease
Musculoskeletal Disorders, Surgery