Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T17:35:21.235Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prioritization of congenital cardiac surgical patients using fuzzy reasoning – a solution to the problem of the waiting list?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2006

Ralf Holzer ,
Ed Ladusans ,
Denise Kitchiner ,
Ian Peart ,
Gordon Gladman  and
Gail Miles
Ralf Holzer
Affiliation:
Department of Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery, Royal Liverpool Children's NHS Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Ed Ladusans
Affiliation:
Department of Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery, Royal Liverpool Children's NHS Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Denise Kitchiner
Affiliation:
Department of Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery, Royal Liverpool Children's NHS Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Ian Peart
Affiliation:
Department of Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery, Royal Liverpool Children's NHS Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Gordon Gladman
Affiliation:
Department of Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery, Royal Liverpool Children's NHS Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Gail Miles
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, Lenoir-Rhyne College, North Carolina, United States of America and University of Liverpool, United Kingdom
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Surgical waiting lists are of high importance in countries, where the national health system is unable to deliver surgical services at a rate that would allow patients to avoid unnecessary periods of waiting. Prioritization of these lists, however, is frequently arbitrary and inconsistent.

The objective of our research was to analyze the medical decision-making process when prioritizing patients with congenital cardiac malformations for cardiac surgical procedures, identifying an appropriate representation of knowledge, and transferring this knowledge onto the design and implementation of an expert system (“PrioHeart”).

The medical decision-making process was stratified into three stages. The first was to analyze the details of the procedure and patient to define important impact factors on clinical priority, such as the risk of adverse events. The second step was to evaluate these impact factors to define an appropriate “timing category” within which a procedure should be performed. The third, and final, step was to re-evaluate the characteristics of individual patients to differentiate between those in the same timing category.

We implemented this decision-making process using a rule-based production system with support for fuzzy sets, using the FuzzyCLIPS inference engine and expert system shell as a suitable development environment for the knowledge base.

The “PrioHeart” expert system was developed to give paediatric cardiologists a tool to allow and facilitate the prioritization of patients on the cardiosurgical waiting list. Evaluation of “PrioHeart” on limited sets of patients documented appropriate results of prioritization, with a significant correlation between the prioritization made using “PrioHeart” and those results obtained by the individual consultant specialist.

We conclude that our study has demonstrated the feasibility of using an expert system approach with a fuzzy, rule-based production system to implement the prioritization of cardiac surgical patients. The approach may potentially be transferable to other medical subspecialities.

Keywords

Heart defectscongenitalexpert systemsmanagement
Type
Original Article
Information
Cardiology in the Young , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , June 2006 , pp. 289 - 299
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Garibaldi JM, Westgate JA, Ifeachor EC. The evaluation of an expert system for the analysis of umbilical cord blood. Artif Intell Med 1999; 17: 109–130.Google Scholar
Prasad BN, Finkelstein SM, Hertz MI. An expert system for diagnosis and therapy in lung transplantation. Computers In Biology And Medicine 1996; 26: 477–488.Google Scholar
Reid J. National Standards, Local action: Health and social care standards and planning framework. Internet. 2004. Department of Health. Available from: http://www.iit.nrc.ca/IR_public/fuzzy/fuzzyclips/fuzzyCLIPSIndex2.html
Zadeh LA. Fuzzy Sets. Information and Control 1965; 8: 338–353.Google Scholar
Orchard B. FuzzyCLIPS Version 6.10d User's Guide. Internet. 2004. Available from: http://www.iit.nrc.ca/IR_public/fuzzy/fuzzyClips/ fuzzyCLIPSIndex2.html
Giarratano J. CLIPS 6.20 User's Guide. Internet. 2002. Available from: http://www.ghg.net/clips/download/documentation/usrguide.pdf (Accessed: 30 July 2005).
Giarratano J, Riley GD. Expert Systems: Principles and Programming. 4th edn. Course Technology, 2004.
Franklin RC, Spiegelhalter DJ, Macartney FJ, Bull K. Combining clinical judgement and statistical data in expert systems: over-the-telephone management decisions for critical congenital heart disease in the first month of life. Int J Clin Monit Comput 1989; 6: 157–166.Google Scholar
Peek N, Ottenkamp J. Developing a decision-theoretic network for congenital heart disease. In: Keravnou EC, Garbay R, Baud R, Wyatt J (eds). AIME '97: Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine Europe. Springer, Berlin, 1997, pp 157–168. Available from: http://www.library.uu.nl/ digiarchief/dip/dispute/2001-0227-134424/1997-02.pdf (Accessed: 30 July 2005).
Long WJ, Fraser H, Naimi S. Reasoning requirements for diagnosis of heart disease. Artif Intell Med 1997; 10: 5–24.Google Scholar
Ng KC, Abramson B. Uncertainty Management in Expert Systems. IEEE 1990; 29–48.Google Scholar
MacCormick AD, Collecutt WG, Parry BR. Prioritizing patients for elective surgery: A systematic review. ANZ J Surg 2003; 73: 633–642.Google Scholar