Exploring the experiences and views of doctors working with Artificial Intelligence in English healthcare; a qualitative study

Healthcare leaders' experiences of implementing artificial intelligence for medical history-taking and triage in Swedish primary care: an interview study

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) holds significant promise for enhancing the efficiency and safety of medical history-taking and triage within primary care. However, there remains a dearth of knowledge concerning the practical implementation of AI systems for these purposes, particularly in the context of healthcare leadership. This study explores the experiences of healthcare leaders regarding the barriers to implementing an AI application for automating medical history-taking and triage in Swedish primary care, as well as the actions they took to overcome these barriers. Furthermore, the study seeks to provide insights that can inform the development of AI implementation strategies for healthcare.

METHODS

We adopted an inductive qualitative approach, conducting semi-structured interviews with 13 healthcare leaders representing seven primary care units across three regions in Sweden. The collected data were subsequently analysed utilizing thematic analysis. Our study adhered to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research to ensure transparent and comprehensive reporting.

RESULTS

The study identified implementation barriers encountered by healthcare leaders across three domains: (1) healthcare professionals, (2) organization, and (3) technology. The first domain involved professional scepticism and resistance, the second involved adapting traditional units for digital care, and the third inadequacies in AI application functionality and system integration. To navigate around these barriers, the leaders took steps to (1) address inexperience and fear and reduce professional scepticism, (2) align implementation with digital maturity and guide patients towards digital care, and (3) refine and improve the AI application and adapt to the current state of AI application development.

CONCLUSION

The study provides valuable empirical insights into the implementation of AI for automating medical history-taking and triage in primary care as experienced by healthcare leaders. It identifies the barriers to this implementation and how healthcare leaders aligned their actions to overcome them. While progress was evident in overcoming professional-related and organizational-related barriers, unresolved technical complexities highlight the importance of AI implementation strategies that consider how leaders handle AI implementation in situ based on practical wisdom and tacit understanding. This underscores the necessity of a holistic approach for the successful implementation of AI in healthcare.

Assessing AI Awareness and Identifying Essential Competencies: Insights From Key Stakeholders in Integrating AI Into Medical Education

Background

The increasing importance of artificial intelligence (AI) in health care has generated a growing need for health care professionals to possess a comprehensive understanding of AI technologies, requiring an adaptation in medical education.

Objective

This paper explores stakeholder perceptions and expectations regarding AI in medicine and examines their potential impact on the medical curriculum. This study project aims to assess the AI experiences and awareness of different stakeholders and identify essential AI-related topics in medical education to define necessary competencies for students.

Methods

The empirical data were collected as part of the TüKITZMed project between August 2022 and March 2023, using a semistructured qualitative interview. These interviews were administered to a diverse group of stakeholders to explore their experiences and perspectives of AI in medicine. A qualitative content analysis of the collected data was conducted using MAXQDA software.

Results

Semistructured interviews were conducted with 38 participants (6 lecturers, 9 clinicians, 10 students, 6 AI experts, and 7 institutional stakeholders). The qualitative content analysis revealed 6 primary categories with a total of 24 subcategories to answer the research questions. The evaluation of the stakeholders' statements revealed several commonalities and differences regarding their understanding of AI. Crucial identified AI themes based on the main categories were as follows: possible curriculum contents, skills, and competencies; programming skills; curriculum scope; and curriculum structure.

Conclusions

The analysis emphasizes integrating AI into medical curricula to ensure students' proficiency in clinical applications. Standardized AI comprehension is crucial for defining and teaching relevant content. Considering diverse perspectives in implementation is essential to comprehensively define AI in the medical context, addressing gaps and facilitating effective solutions for future AI use in medical studies. The results provide insights into potential curriculum content and structure, including aspects of AI in medicine.

Ethical considerations and concerns in the implementation of AI in pharmacy practice: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into healthcare has raised significant ethical concerns. In pharmacy practice, AI offers promising advances but also poses ethical challenges.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted in countries from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region on 501 pharmacy professionals. A 12-item online questionnaire assessed ethical concerns related to the adoption of AI in pharmacy practice. Demographic factors associated with ethical concerns were analyzed via SPSS v.27 software using appropriate statistical tests.

RESULTS

Participants expressed concerns about patient data privacy (58.9%), cybersecurity threats (58.9%), potential job displacement (62.9%), and lack of legal regulation (67.0%). Tech-savviness and basic AI understanding were correlated with higher concern scores (p < 0.001). Ethical implications include the need for informed consent, beneficence, justice, and transparency in the use of AI.

CONCLUSION

The findings emphasize the importance of ethical guidelines, education, and patient autonomy in adopting AI. Collaboration, data privacy, and equitable access are crucial to the responsible use of AI in pharmacy practice.

The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Head and Neck Cancers: A Multidisciplinary Survey

Artificial intelligence (AI) approaches have been introduced in various disciplines but remain rather unused in head and neck (H&N) cancers. This survey aimed to infer the current applications of and attitudes toward AI in the multidisciplinary care of H&N cancers. From November 2020 to June 2022, a web-based questionnaire examining the relationship between AI usage and professionals' demographics and attitudes was delivered to different professionals involved in H&N cancers through social media and mailing lists. A total of 139 professionals completed the questionnaire. Only 49.7% of the respondents reported having experience with AI. The most frequent AI users were radiologists (66.2%). Significant predictors of AI use were primary specialty (V = 0.455; p < 0.001), academic qualification and age. AI's potential was seen in the improvement of diagnostic accuracy (72%), surgical planning (64.7%), treatment selection (57.6%), risk assessment (50.4%) and the prediction of complications (45.3%). Among participants, 42.7% had significant concerns over AI use, with the most frequent being the 'loss of control' (27.6%) and 'diagnostic errors' (57.0%). This survey reveals limited engagement with AI in multidisciplinary H&N cancer care, highlighting the need for broader implementation and further studies to explore its acceptance and benefits.

Strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-threats analysis of artificial intelligence in anesthesiology and perioperative medicine

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in anesthesiology and perioperative medicine is quickly becoming a mainstay of clinical practice. Anesthesiology is a data-rich medical specialty that integrates multitudes of patient-specific information. Perioperative medicine is ripe for applications of AI and ML to facilitate data synthesis for precision medicine and predictive assessments. Examples of emergent AI models include those that assist in assessing depth and modulating control of anesthetic delivery, event and risk prediction, ultrasound guidance, pain management, and operating room logistics. AI and ML support analyzing integrated perioperative data at scale and can assess patterns to deliver optimal patient-specific care. By exploring the benefits and limitations of this technology, we provide a basis of considerations for evaluating the adoption of AI models into various anesthesiology workflows. This analysis of AI and ML in anesthesiology and perioperative medicine explores the current landscape to understand better the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) these tools offer.

Experiences of using artificial intelligence in healthcare: a qualitative study of UK clinician and key stakeholder perspectives

OBJECTIVES

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a rapidly developing field in healthcare, with tools being developed across various specialties to support healthcare professionals and reduce workloads. It is important to understand the experiences of professionals working in healthcare to ensure that future AI tools are acceptable and effectively implemented. The aim of this study was to gain an in-depth understanding of the experiences and perceptions of UK healthcare workers and other key stakeholders about the use of AI in the National Health Service (NHS).

DESIGN

A qualitative study using semistructured interviews conducted remotely via MS Teams. Thematic analysis was carried out.

SETTING

NHS and UK higher education institutes.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirteen participants were recruited, including clinical and non-clinical participants working for the NHS and researchers working to develop AI tools for healthcare settings.

RESULTS

Four core themes were identified: positive perceptions of AI; potential barriers to using AI in healthcare; concerns regarding AI use and steps needed to ensure the acceptability of future AI tools. Overall, we found that those working in healthcare were generally open to the use of AI and expected it to have many benefits for patients and facilitate access to care. However, concerns were raised regarding the security of patient data, the potential for misdiagnosis and that AI could increase the burden on already strained healthcare staff.

CONCLUSION

This study found that healthcare staff are willing to engage with AI research and incorporate AI tools into care pathways. Going forward, the NHS and AI developers will need to collaborate closely to ensure that future tools are suitable for their intended use and do not negatively impact workloads or patient trust. Future AI studies should continue to incorporate the views of key stakeholders to improve tool acceptability.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05028179; ISRCTN15113915; IRAS ref: 293515.

Physicians' Perspectives on AI in Clinical Decision Support Systems: Interview Study of the CURATE.AI Personalized Dose Optimization Platform

BACKGROUND

Physicians play a key role in integrating new clinical technology into care practices through user feedback and growth propositions to developers of the technology. As physicians are stakeholders involved through the technology iteration process, understanding their roles as users can provide nuanced insights into the workings of these technologies that are being explored. Therefore, understanding physicians' perceptions can be critical toward clinical validation, implementation, and downstream adoption. Given the increasing prevalence of clinical decision support systems (CDSSs), there remains a need to gain an in-depth understanding of physicians' perceptions and expectations toward their downstream implementation. This paper explores physicians' perceptions of integrating CURATE.AI, a novel artificial intelligence (AI)-based and clinical stage personalized dosing CDSSs, into clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to understand physicians' perspectives of integrating CURATE.AI for clinical work and to gather insights on considerations of the implementation of AI-based CDSS tools.

METHODS

A total of 12 participants completed semistructured interviews examining their knowledge, experience, attitudes, risks, and future course of the personalized combination therapy dosing platform, CURATE.AI. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and coded manually. The data were thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

Overall, 3 broad themes and 9 subthemes were identified through thematic analysis. The themes covered considerations that physicians perceived as significant across various stages of new technology development, including trial, clinical implementation, and mass adoption.

CONCLUSIONS

The study laid out the various ways physicians interpreted an AI-based personalized dosing CDSS, CURATE.AI, for their clinical practice. The research pointed out that physicians' expectations during the different stages of technology exploration can be nuanced and layered with expectations of implementation that are relevant for technology developers and researchers.

Artificial intelligence education: An evidence-based medicine approach for consumers, translators, and developers

Current and future healthcare professionals are generally not trained to cope with the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) technology in healthcare. To design a curriculum that caters to variable baseline knowledge and skills, clinicians may be conceptualized as "consumers", "translators", or "developers". The changes required of medical education because of AI innovation are linked to those brought about by evidence-based medicine (EBM). We outline a core curriculum for AI education of future consumers, translators, and developers, emphasizing the links between AI and EBM, with suggestions for how teaching may be integrated into existing curricula. We consider the key barriers to implementation of AI in the medical curriculum: time, resources, variable interest, and knowledge retention. By improving AI literacy rates and fostering a translator- and developer-enriched workforce, innovation may be accelerated for the benefit of patients and practitioners.