Patient deterioration is a perennial hospital safety challenge. Patients whose conditions worsen often show warning signs before crisis—vital sign trends, subtle clinical changes, laboratory patterns. The challenge is recognising these signs early enough to intervene.

Traditional approaches—early warning scores (EWS), rapid response teams, structured observation protocols—have helped but haven’t solved the problem. AI offers potential for earlier, more accurate deterioration prediction.

This is one of the more mature clinical AI applications, with meaningful Australian experience to draw on.

The Problem AI Addresses

Unrecognised deterioration kills patients. Studies consistently show that cardiac arrests and ICU admissions are often preceded by warning signs that weren’t acted upon.

Traditional early warning scores use vital sign thresholds to trigger escalation. They work, but have limitations:

• They’re threshold-based (missing gradual trends)
• They weight all patients equally (ignoring individual baselines)
• They rely on observation frequency (missing changes between observations)
• They generate many false positives (causing alert fatigue)
• They can be manipulated (observations adjusted to avoid triggering)

AI deterioration prediction can address some of these limitations by:

• Analysing trends, not just thresholds
• Learning individual patient patterns
• Integrating multiple data streams continuously
• Optimising alert sensitivity for clinical utility
• Being harder to game than simple scores

What AI Deterioration Systems Do

Modern AI deterioration prediction systems typically:

Ingest multiple data sources. Not just vital signs, but also laboratory results, medication administration, clinical notes, nursing assessments, and device data.

Model continuously. Risk recalculated regularly (often hourly or more frequently) as new data arrives.

Generate risk scores. Patients assigned deterioration risk scores that can be trended over time.

Trigger alerts. When risk exceeds thresholds or increases significantly, alerts go to clinical staff.

Explain predictions. Many systems provide explanation of what factors are driving high risk.

Integrate with workflows. Alerts delivered through clinical systems, pagers, or dashboards rather than standalone applications.

Australian Experience

Several Australian health services have implemented AI deterioration prediction:

Epic’s Deterioration Index is deployed in some Epic-using health services, providing continuous risk scoring integrated with the electronic medical record.

Cerner’s sepsis and deterioration solutions are used in Cerner environments, similarly integrated.

Third-party solutions from various vendors are deployed in some settings, often integrated with existing clinical systems.

Local development has occurred in some academic medical centres, with researchers building and validating systems on local data.

The experience is mixed:

Positive outcomes. Some implementations report reduced cardiac arrests, earlier ICU escalation, and improved rapid response team activation patterns.

Implementation challenges. Alert fatigue remains a problem. Integration with existing workflows is often difficult. Clinician trust takes time to build.

Evidence gaps. Rigorous before-after studies with adequate controls are limited. It’s hard to know how much of observed improvement is due to AI versus other concurrent changes.

Critical Success Factors

From implementations I’ve observed, success factors include:

Clinical Integration

AI that sits outside clinical workflow gets ignored. Effective implementations:

• Deliver alerts through existing communication systems
• Integrate with rapid response protocols
• Embed in clinical dashboards clinicians actually use
• Connect to electronic medical record documentation

Standalone applications fail.

Alert Optimisation

Too many alerts causes fatigue; too few misses deterioration. Effective implementations:

• Start with higher thresholds and adjust based on experience
• Monitor alert-to-intervention rates
• Gather clinician feedback on alert utility
• Accept that optimisation is ongoing, not one-time

Getting alert thresholds right is iterative work.

Clinical Champion Leadership

Successful implementations have strong clinical leadership:

• Clinicians who believe in the AI and advocate for it
• Integration with clinical governance structures
• Authority to modify clinical protocols based on AI
• Credibility with frontline staff

Technology-led implementations without clinical champions struggle. AI consultants Brisbane confirm that identifying and supporting clinical champions is one of the first things they do when engaging with health services on deterioration AI projects.

Realistic Expectations

AI won’t eliminate deterioration. Expectations should be:

• Incremental improvement, not transformation
• Some false positives are acceptable for sensitivity
• Implementation takes months, not weeks
• Benefits may take time to demonstrate

Over-promising leads to disappointment.

Outcome Measurement

Track whether AI is working:

• Cardiac arrest rates
• Unplanned ICU admissions
• Rapid response call patterns
• Time from deterioration to escalation
• Alert response rates

Without measurement, you’re trusting rather than knowing.

Concerns and Limitations

Honest assessment includes acknowledging limitations:

Alert fatigue is real. Even good AI generates false positives. Managing alert volume while maintaining sensitivity is difficult.

Not all deterioration is predictable. Some clinical declines are sudden without preceding warning signs. AI can’t predict the unpredictable.

Implementation is hard. Technical integration, workflow change, training, and governance all require substantial effort.

Evidence quality is limited. Stronger randomised controlled trials would help establish confidence in effectiveness.

Equity implications. If AI performs differently for different patient groups, deterioration prediction might worsen rather than improve equity.

Staff deskilling. Over-reliance on AI might degrade clinical assessment skills over time.

Practical Recommendations

For organisations considering deterioration AI:

Assess Readiness

Before implementing:

• Do you have electronic vital signs and laboratory data?
• Is your rapid response system mature?
• Do you have clinical informatics capability?
• Is clinical governance prepared to oversee AI?

Weak foundations undermine AI implementation.

Choose Integration-First

Prioritise solutions that integrate with your existing systems. AI from your EMR vendor (if you have one) typically integrates better than third-party solutions.

For organisations evaluating options, working with experienced partners helps. AI consultants Sydney and similar firms can advise on vendor options and integration approaches.

Plan for Workflow Change

Implementation isn’t just technical. Plan for:

• Training clinical staff on AI alerts and response
• Modifying rapid response protocols
• Documenting AI in clinical governance
• Creating escalation pathways for AI concerns

Start With Pilot

Don’t deploy organisation-wide immediately. Start with:

• Specific wards or units
• Limited patient populations
• Time-bounded pilot period
• Intensive monitoring and evaluation

Learn and adjust before scaling.

Commit to Ongoing Optimisation

Alert thresholds, integration, and clinical protocols will need ongoing adjustment. This isn’t a set-and-forget implementation.

Looking Forward

Deterioration prediction AI will continue developing:

Continuous monitoring integration. Wearable and bedside monitoring providing richer data streams.

Earlier prediction. Moving from hours-before to days-before prediction, enabling earlier intervention.

Personalisation. Models that learn individual patient patterns for more accurate prediction.

Intervention guidance. Not just “this patient is deteriorating” but “this is likely what’s causing it.”

These developments will improve capability, but implementation challenges will persist. The technology is less limiting than the implementation.

For Australian hospitals, deterioration prediction is one of the most evidence-supported clinical AI applications. It’s not easy to implement, and it’s not transformative, but it can meaningfully improve patient safety when done well.

That’s worth pursuing carefully.

---

Dr. Rebecca Liu is a health informatics specialist and former Chief Clinical Information Officer. She advises healthcare organisations on clinical AI strategy and implementation.