Effective Communication of Personalized Risks and Patient Preferences During Surgical Informed Consent Using Data Visualization: Qualitative Semistructured Interview Study With Patients After Surgery

Can AI Answer My Questions? Utilizing Artificial Intelligence in the Perioperative Assessment for Abdominoplasty Patients

BACKGROUND

Abdominoplasty is a common operation, used for a range of cosmetic and functional issues, often in the context of divarication of recti, significant weight loss, and after pregnancy. Despite this, patient-surgeon communication gaps can hinder informed decision-making. The integration of large language models (LLMs) in healthcare offers potential for enhancing patient information. This study evaluated the feasibility of using LLMs for answering perioperative queries.

METHODS

This study assessed the efficacy of four leading LLMs-OpenAI's ChatGPT-3.5, Anthropic's Claude, Google's Gemini, and Bing's CoPilot-using fifteen unique prompts. All outputs were evaluated using the Flesch-Kincaid, Flesch Reading Ease score, and Coleman-Liau index for readability assessment. The DISCERN score and a Likert scale were utilized to evaluate quality. Scores were assigned by two plastic surgical residents and then reviewed and discussed until a consensus was reached by five plastic surgeon specialists.

RESULTS

ChatGPT-3.5 required the highest level for comprehension, followed by Gemini, Claude, then CoPilot. Claude provided the most appropriate and actionable advice. In terms of patient-friendliness, CoPilot outperformed the rest, enhancing engagement and information comprehensiveness. ChatGPT-3.5 and Gemini offered adequate, though unremarkable, advice, employing more professional language. CoPilot uniquely included visual aids and was the only model to use hyperlinks, although they were not very helpful and acceptable, and it faced limitations in responding to certain queries.

CONCLUSION

ChatGPT-3.5, Gemini, Claude, and Bing's CoPilot showcased differences in readability and reliability. LLMs offer unique advantages for patient care but require careful selection. Future research should integrate LLM strengths and address weaknesses for optimal patient education.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Bedside preoperative predictors of difficult laryngeal exposure in microlaryngeal surgery

PURPOSE

Successful microlaryngeal surgery relies on an adequate laryngeal exposure. Recognizing the likelihood of challenging exposure prior to microlaryngeal surgery may assist in selecting the appropriate surgical approach and even prompt consideration of alternative treatment options. We aim to apply the mini-Laryngoscore, a preoperative assessment tool, to our study population and incorporate novel variables to optimize the prediction model.

METHODS

This single-center prospective cohort study included 80 consecutive patients undergoing elective microlaryngeal surgery, from January 1, to June 30, 2023. Each patient underwent a presurgical evaluation of 15 parameters and an intraoperative scoring of the anterior commissure visualization. These parameters were assessed for their association with difficult laryngeal exposure, using multiple logistic regression analysis. We created a novel prediction model for DLE and compared it with the existing model, the mini-Laryngoscore.

RESULTS

Out of 80 patients, 24 (30%) patients had difficult laryngeal exposure, including 3 cases (3.8%) in which visualization of the anterior commissure was not possible. A large neck diameter (OR, 1.4; CI 1.1-1.9) and the presence of upper teeth (OR, 8.9; CI 1.3-62.8) were independent risk factors for a difficult laryngeal exposure, while a larger interincisors gap was the only independent protector factor (OR, 0.3; CI 0.1-0.8). The logistic regression model combining these three independent risk factors displayed a high discriminative value AUC = 0.89 (CI 0.81-0.97). The predictive performance of the mini-Laryngoscore was 0.73 (CI 0.62-0.85).

CONCLUSION

Combining two parameters from the mini-Laryngoscore (upper jaw dental state and interincisors gap distance) with neck circumference measurement can accurately predict the risk of difficult laryngeal exposure.

An Individualized Postoperative Pain Risk Communication Tool for Use in Pediatric Surgery: Co-Design and Usability Evaluation

BACKGROUND

Risk identification and communication tools have the potential to improve health care by supporting clinician-patient or family discussion of treatment risks and benefits and helping patients make more informed decisions; however, they have yet to be tailored to pediatric surgery. User-centered design principles can help to ensure the successful development and uptake of health care tools.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to develop and evaluate the usability of an easy-to-use tool to communicate a child's risk of postoperative pain to improve informed and collaborative preoperative decision-making between clinicians and families.

METHODS

With research ethics board approval, we conducted web-based co-design sessions with clinicians and family participants (people with lived surgical experience and parents of children who had recently undergone a surgical or medical procedure) at a tertiary pediatric hospital. Qualitative data from these sessions were analyzed thematically using NVivo (Lumivero) to identify design requirements to inform the iterative redesign of an existing prototype. We then evaluated the usability of our final prototype in one-to-one sessions with a new group of participants, in which we measured mental workload with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Task Load Index (TLX) and user satisfaction with the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ).

RESULTS

A total of 12 participants (8 clinicians and 4 family participants) attended 5 co-design sessions. The 5 requirements were identified: (A) present risk severity descriptively and visually; (B) ensure appearance and navigation are user-friendly; (C) frame risk identification and mitigation strategies in positive terms; (D) categorize and describe risks clearly; and (E) emphasize collaboration and effective communication. A total of 12 new participants (7 clinicians and 5 family participants) completed a usability evaluation. Tasks were completed quickly (range 5-17 s) and accurately (range 11/12, 92% to 12/12, 100%), needing only 2 requests for assistance. The median (IQR) NASA TLX performance score of 78 (66-89) indicated that participants felt able to perform the required tasks, and an overall PSSUQ score of 2.1 (IQR 1.5-2.7) suggested acceptable user satisfaction with the tool.

CONCLUSIONS

The key design requirements were identified, and that guided the prototype redesign, which was positively evaluated during usability testing. Implementing a personalized risk communication tool into pediatric surgery can enhance the care process and improve informed and collaborative presurgical preparation and decision-making between clinicians and families of pediatric patients.

How surgeons use risk calculators and non-clinical factors for informed consent and shared decision making: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The discussion of risks, benefits, and alternatives to surgery with patients is a defining component of informed consent. As shared-decision making has become central to surgeon-patient communication, risk calculators have emerged as a tool to aid communication and decision-making. To optimize informed consent, it is necessary to understand how surgeons assess and communicate risk, and the role of risk calculators in this process.

METHODS

We conducted interviews with 13 surgeons from two institutions to understand how surgeons assess risk, the role of risk calculators in decision-making, and how surgeons approach risk communication during informed consent. We performed a qualitative analysis of interviews based on SRQR guidelines.

RESULTS

Our analysis yielded insights regarding (a) the landscape and approach to obtaining surgical consent; (b) detailed perceptions regarding the value and design of assessing and communicating risk; and (c) practical considerations regarding the future of personalized risk communication in decision-making. Above all, we found that non-clinical factors such as health and risk literacy are changing how surgeons assess and communicate risk, which diverges from traditional risk calculators.

CONCLUSION

Principally, we found that surgeons incorporate a range of clinical and non-clinical factors to risk stratify patients and determine how to optimally frame and discuss risk with individual patients. We observed that surgeons' perception of risk communication, and the importance of eliciting patient preferences to direct shared-decision making, did not consistently align with patient priorities. This study underscored criticisms of risk calculators and novel decision-aids - which must be addressed prior to greater adoption.

Morbidity and Mortality of Non-pancreatectomy operations for pancreatic cancer: An ACS-NSQIP analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with pancreas cancer may undergo palliative gastrointestinal or biliary bypass. Recent comparisons of post-operative outcomes following such procedures are lacking.

METHODS

We analyzed patients undergoing exploration, gastrojejunostomy, biliary bypass or double bypass for pancreatic cancer using data from the 2005-2019 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. We compared 30-day mortality and complications across procedures and over time periods (2005-10, 2011-14, 2015-19) using multivariable regression models. Factors associated with postoperative mortality were identified.

RESULTS

Of 43,525 patients undergoing surgery with a postoperative diagnosis of pancreatic cancer, 5572 met inclusion criteria. Palliative operations included 1037 gastrojejunostomies, 792 biliary bypasses, 650 double bypasses, and 3093 explorations. The proportion of biliary and double bypass procedures decreased from 2005-10 to 2015-19. Gastrojejunostomy had higher 30-day mortality rate (11.5%) than other operations (p < 0.001). Adjusted 30-day mortality rates remained stable over time (7.8% vs 6.3%, p = 0.095), while rates of serious complications decreased over time (23.2% vs 17.1%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Palliative bypass for pancreatic cancer has not become safer over time, and 30-day mortality and complications remain high.