Using a simulation centre to evaluate preliminary acceptability and impact of an artificial intelligence-powered clinical decision support system for depression treatment on the physician-patient interaction.
Primary care
artificial intelligence
depressive disorders
out-patient treatment
simulation centre
Journal
BJPsych open
ISSN: 2056-4724
Titre abrégé: BJPsych Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101667931
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Jan 2021
06 Jan 2021
Historique:
entrez:
6
1
2021
pubmed:
7
1
2021
medline:
7
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Recently, artificial intelligence-powered devices have been put forward as potentially powerful tools for the improvement of mental healthcare. An important question is how these devices impact the physician-patient interaction. Aifred is an artificial intelligence-powered clinical decision support system (CDSS) for the treatment of major depression. Here, we explore the use of a simulation centre environment in evaluating the usability of Aifred, particularly its impact on the physician-patient interaction. Twenty psychiatry and family medicine attending staff and residents were recruited to complete a 2.5-h study at a clinical interaction simulation centre with standardised patients. Each physician had the option of using the CDSS to inform their treatment choice in three 10-min clinical scenarios with standardised patients portraying mild, moderate and severe episodes of major depression. Feasibility and acceptability data were collected through self-report questionnaires, scenario observations, interviews and standardised patient feedback. All 20 participants completed the study. Initial results indicate that the tool was acceptable to clinicians and feasible for use during clinical encounters. Clinicians indicated a willingness to use the tool in real clinical practice, a significant degree of trust in the system's predictions to assist with treatment selection, and reported that the tool helped increase patient understanding of and trust in treatment. The simulation environment allowed for the evaluation of the tool's impact on the physician-patient interaction. The simulation centre allowed for direct observations of clinician use and impact of the tool on the clinician-patient interaction before clinical studies. It may therefore offer a useful and important environment in the early testing of new technological tools. The present results will inform further tool development and clinician training materials.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Recently, artificial intelligence-powered devices have been put forward as potentially powerful tools for the improvement of mental healthcare. An important question is how these devices impact the physician-patient interaction.
AIMS
OBJECTIVE
Aifred is an artificial intelligence-powered clinical decision support system (CDSS) for the treatment of major depression. Here, we explore the use of a simulation centre environment in evaluating the usability of Aifred, particularly its impact on the physician-patient interaction.
METHOD
METHODS
Twenty psychiatry and family medicine attending staff and residents were recruited to complete a 2.5-h study at a clinical interaction simulation centre with standardised patients. Each physician had the option of using the CDSS to inform their treatment choice in three 10-min clinical scenarios with standardised patients portraying mild, moderate and severe episodes of major depression. Feasibility and acceptability data were collected through self-report questionnaires, scenario observations, interviews and standardised patient feedback.
RESULTS
RESULTS
All 20 participants completed the study. Initial results indicate that the tool was acceptable to clinicians and feasible for use during clinical encounters. Clinicians indicated a willingness to use the tool in real clinical practice, a significant degree of trust in the system's predictions to assist with treatment selection, and reported that the tool helped increase patient understanding of and trust in treatment. The simulation environment allowed for the evaluation of the tool's impact on the physician-patient interaction.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The simulation centre allowed for direct observations of clinician use and impact of the tool on the clinician-patient interaction before clinical studies. It may therefore offer a useful and important environment in the early testing of new technological tools. The present results will inform further tool development and clinician training materials.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33403948
doi: 10.1192/bjo.2020.127
pii: S2056472420001271
pmc: PMC8058891
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e22Références
BMJ Open. 2020 May 24;10(5):e035905
pubmed: 32448796
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2009 Jan 21;9:6
pubmed: 19159458
PLoS Med. 2013 Nov;10(11):e1001547
pubmed: 24223526
Psychopharmacol Bull. 2008;41(4):5-33
pubmed: 19015627
Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2009;11(4):140-6
pubmed: 19750065
SSM Popul Health. 2017 Jul 28;3:633-638
pubmed: 29349251
Psychiatr Serv. 2004 Aug;55(8):879-85
pubmed: 15292537
J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Sep;16(9):606-13
pubmed: 11556941
Ann Intern Med. 2006 Oct 3;145(7):477-87
pubmed: 17015865
Lancet. 2015 Dec 12;386(10011):2404-12
pubmed: 26423182
Can J Psychiatry. 2016 Sep;61(9):540-60
pubmed: 27486148
J Psychiatr Res. 2019 Apr;111:59-67
pubmed: 30677646
Adv Simul (Lond). 2019 Aug 2;4:19
pubmed: 31388455
Med Teach. 2011;33(12):1005-10
pubmed: 22225438
Can J Psychiatry. 2016 Sep;61(9):510-23
pubmed: 27486151
Lancet Psychiatry. 2016 Mar;3(3):243-50
pubmed: 26803397
Health Serv Res. 1999 Dec;34(5 Pt 2):1189-208
pubmed: 10591279
J Surg Educ. 2017 Nov - Dec;74(6):1135-1141
pubmed: 28688969
Sci Rep. 2018 Apr 3;8(1):5530
pubmed: 29615645
Med Educ. 2009 Mar;43(3):202-10
pubmed: 19250346
Acad Med. 2015 Feb;90(2):246-56
pubmed: 25374041
BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn. 2020 Mar 4;6(2):87-94
pubmed: 32133154
Eval Health Prof. 1978 Summer;1(2):47-65
pubmed: 10308062
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2004 Jul;61(7):669-80
pubmed: 15237079
Psychol Med. 1993 Aug;23(3):679-90
pubmed: 8234575
BMC Med. 2011 Jul 26;9:90
pubmed: 21791035
Am J Psychiatry. 2011 Jul;168(7):689-701
pubmed: 21536692
Acad Psychiatry. 2011 Nov 1;35(6):382-7
pubmed: 22193736
Patient. 2020 Feb;13(1):23-30
pubmed: 31544218
J Gen Intern Med. 2002 Jul;17(7):493-503
pubmed: 12133139
J Psychiatr Res. 2016 Jul;78:11-23
pubmed: 27038550
Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2007 Dec;9(6):449-59
pubmed: 18221624
Focus (Am Psychiatr Publ). 2018 Oct;16(4):420-429
pubmed: 32021580
Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2017 Sep 1;20(9):721-730
pubmed: 28645191
Front Artif Intell. 2020 Jan 21;2:31
pubmed: 33733120
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2005 Apr;12(2):146-53
pubmed: 15788031
Psychol Med. 2019 May;49(7):1118-1127
pubmed: 29962359
Fam Pract. 1997 Feb;14(1):58-62
pubmed: 9061346