Perioperative application of chatbots: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 4.1 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMJ Health & Care Informatics Pub Date : 2024-07-20 DOI:10.1136/bmjhci-2023-100985
Shih-Jung Lin, Chin-Yu Sun, Dan-Ni Chen, Yi-No Kang, Nai Ming Lai, Kee-Hsin Chen, Chiehfeng Chen
{"title":"Perioperative application of chatbots: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Shih-Jung Lin, Chin-Yu Sun, Dan-Ni Chen, Yi-No Kang, Nai Ming Lai, Kee-Hsin Chen, Chiehfeng Chen","doi":"10.1136/bmjhci-2023-100985","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Patient-clinician communication and shared decision-making face challenges in the perioperative period. Chatbots have emerged as valuable support tools in perioperative care. A simultaneous and complete comparison of overall benefits and harm of chatbot application is conducted.</p><p><strong>Materials: </strong>MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for studies published before May 2023 on the benefits and harm of chatbots used in the perioperative period. The major outcomes assessed were patient satisfaction and knowledge acquisition. Untransformed proportion (PR) with a 95% CI was used for the analysis of continuous data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool version 2 and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight trials comprising 1073 adults from four countries were included. Most interventions (n = 5, 62.5%) targeted perioperative care in orthopaedics. Most interventions use rule-based chatbots (n = 7, 87.5%). This meta-analysis found that the majority of the participants were satisfied with the use of chatbots (mean proportion=0.73; 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.85), and agreed that they gained knowledge in their perioperative period (mean proportion=0.80; 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.87).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review demonstrates that perioperative chatbots are well received by the majority of patients with no reports of harm to-date. Chatbots may be considered as an aid in perioperative communication between patients and clinicians and shared decision-making. These findings may be used to guide the healthcare providers, policymakers and researchers for enhancing perioperative care.</p>","PeriodicalId":9050,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11261686/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2023-100985","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Patient-clinician communication and shared decision-making face challenges in the perioperative period. Chatbots have emerged as valuable support tools in perioperative care. A simultaneous and complete comparison of overall benefits and harm of chatbot application is conducted.

Materials: MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for studies published before May 2023 on the benefits and harm of chatbots used in the perioperative period. The major outcomes assessed were patient satisfaction and knowledge acquisition. Untransformed proportion (PR) with a 95% CI was used for the analysis of continuous data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool version 2 and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies.

Results: Eight trials comprising 1073 adults from four countries were included. Most interventions (n = 5, 62.5%) targeted perioperative care in orthopaedics. Most interventions use rule-based chatbots (n = 7, 87.5%). This meta-analysis found that the majority of the participants were satisfied with the use of chatbots (mean proportion=0.73; 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.85), and agreed that they gained knowledge in their perioperative period (mean proportion=0.80; 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.87).

Conclusion: This review demonstrates that perioperative chatbots are well received by the majority of patients with no reports of harm to-date. Chatbots may be considered as an aid in perioperative communication between patients and clinicians and shared decision-making. These findings may be used to guide the healthcare providers, policymakers and researchers for enhancing perioperative care.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
聊天机器人的围手术期应用:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景和目的:在围手术期,患者与医生之间的沟通和共同决策面临挑战。聊天机器人已成为围手术期护理的重要支持工具。我们同时对聊天机器人应用的整体利益和危害进行了全面比较:系统检索了 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 图书馆在 2023 年 5 月之前发表的关于围手术期使用聊天机器人的益处和害处的研究。评估的主要结果是患者满意度和知识获取。连续数据的分析采用未经转换的比例 (PR) 和 95% CI。使用 Cochrane 第 2 版偏倚风险评估工具和非随机研究方法指数评估偏倚风险:共纳入了 8 项试验,包括来自 4 个国家的 1073 名成人。大多数干预措施(n = 5,62.5%)针对骨科围手术期护理。大多数干预措施使用基于规则的聊天机器人(n = 7,87.5%)。这项荟萃分析发现,大多数参与者对聊天机器人的使用感到满意(平均比例=0.73;95% CI:0.62 至 0.85),并认为他们在围手术期获得了知识(平均比例=0.80;95% CI:0.74 至 0.87):本综述表明,围手术期聊天机器人受到了大多数患者的欢迎,迄今为止还没有关于伤害的报道。聊天机器人可被视为围术期患者与临床医生沟通和共同决策的辅助工具。这些发现可用于指导医疗服务提供者、决策者和研究人员加强围手术期护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
4.90%
发文量
40
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Scaling equitable artificial intelligence in healthcare with machine learning operations. Understanding prescribing errors for system optimisation: the technology-related error mechanism classification. Detection of hypertension from pharyngeal images using deep learning algorithm in primary care settings in Japan. PubMed captures more fine-grained bibliographic data on scientific commentary than Web of Science: a comparative analysis. Method to apply temporal graph analysis on electronic patient record data to explore healthcare professional-patient interaction intensity: a cohort study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1