German surgeons' perspective on the application of artificial intelligence in clinical decision-making.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-05 DOI:10.1007/s11548-025-03326-z
Jonas Henn, Tijs Vandemeulebroucke, Simon Hatterscheidt, Jonas Dohmen, Jörg C Kalff, Aimee van Wynsberghe, Hanno Matthaei
{"title":"German surgeons' perspective on the application of artificial intelligence in clinical decision-making.","authors":"Jonas Henn, Tijs Vandemeulebroucke, Simon Hatterscheidt, Jonas Dohmen, Jörg C Kalff, Aimee van Wynsberghe, Hanno Matthaei","doi":"10.1007/s11548-025-03326-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming clinical decision-making (CDM). This application of AI should be a conscious choice to avoid technological determinism. The surgeons' perspective is needed to guide further implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an online survey among German surgeons, focusing on digitalization and AI in CDM, specifically for acute abdominal pain (AAP). The survey included Likert items and scales.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We analyzed 263 responses. Seventy-one percentage of participants were male, with a median age of 49 years (IQR 41-57). Seventy-three percentage of participants carried out a senior role, with a median of 22 years of work experience (IQR 13-28). AI in CDM was seen as helpful for workload management (48%) but not for preventing unnecessary treatments (32%). Safety (95%), evidence (94%), and usability (96%) were prioritized over costs (43%) for the implementation. Concerns included the loss of practical CDM skills (81%) and ethical issues like transparency (52%), patient trust (45%), and physician integrity (44%). Traditional CDM for AAP was seen as experience-based (93%) and not standardized (31%), whereas AI was perceived to assist with urgency triage (60%) and resource management (59%). On median, generation Y showed more confidence in AI for CDM (P = 0.001), while participants working in primary care hospitals were less confident (P = 0.021).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Participants saw the potential of AI for organizational tasks but are hesitant about its use in CDM. Concerns about trust and performance need to be addressed through education and critical evaluation. In the future, AI might provide sufficient decision support but will not replace the human component.</p>","PeriodicalId":51251,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-025-03326-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming clinical decision-making (CDM). This application of AI should be a conscious choice to avoid technological determinism. The surgeons' perspective is needed to guide further implementation.

Methods: We conducted an online survey among German surgeons, focusing on digitalization and AI in CDM, specifically for acute abdominal pain (AAP). The survey included Likert items and scales.

Results: We analyzed 263 responses. Seventy-one percentage of participants were male, with a median age of 49 years (IQR 41-57). Seventy-three percentage of participants carried out a senior role, with a median of 22 years of work experience (IQR 13-28). AI in CDM was seen as helpful for workload management (48%) but not for preventing unnecessary treatments (32%). Safety (95%), evidence (94%), and usability (96%) were prioritized over costs (43%) for the implementation. Concerns included the loss of practical CDM skills (81%) and ethical issues like transparency (52%), patient trust (45%), and physician integrity (44%). Traditional CDM for AAP was seen as experience-based (93%) and not standardized (31%), whereas AI was perceived to assist with urgency triage (60%) and resource management (59%). On median, generation Y showed more confidence in AI for CDM (P = 0.001), while participants working in primary care hospitals were less confident (P = 0.021).

Conclusion: Participants saw the potential of AI for organizational tasks but are hesitant about its use in CDM. Concerns about trust and performance need to be addressed through education and critical evaluation. In the future, AI might provide sufficient decision support but will not replace the human component.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL-RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
243
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal for Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery (IJCARS) is a peer-reviewed journal that provides a platform for closing the gap between medical and technical disciplines, and encourages interdisciplinary research and development activities in an international environment.
期刊最新文献
Intraoperative adaptive eye model based on instrument-integrated OCT for robot-assisted vitreoretinal surgery. A deep learning-driven method for safe and effective ERCP cannulation. German surgeons' perspective on the application of artificial intelligence in clinical decision-making. Multi-modal dataset creation for federated learning with DICOM-structured reports. DenseSeg: joint learning for semantic segmentation and landmark detection using dense image-to-shape representation.
×
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