Artificial Intelligence–Assisted System in Postoperative Follow-up of Orthopedic Patients: Exploratory Quantitative and Qualitative Study (Preprint)

Abstract

<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Patient follow-up is an essential part of hospital ward management. With the development of deep learning algorithms, individual follow-up assignments might be completed by artificial intelligence (AI). We developed an AI-assisted follow-up conversational agent that can simulate the human voice and select an appropriate follow-up time for quantitative, automatic, and personalized patient follow-up. Patient feedback and voice information could be collected and converted into text data automatically. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> The primary objective of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of AI-assisted follow-up to manual follow-up of patients after surgery. The secondary objective was to compare the feedback from AI-assisted follow-up to feedback from manual follow-up. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> The AI-assisted follow-up system was adopted in the Orthopedic Department of Peking Union Medical College Hospital in April 2019. A total of 270 patients were followed up through this system. Prior to that, 2656 patients were followed up by phone calls manually. Patient characteristics, telephone connection rate, follow-up rate, feedback collection rate, time spent, and feedback composition were compared between the two groups of patients. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> There was no statistically significant difference in age, gender, or disease between the two groups. There was no significant difference in telephone connection rate (manual: 2478/2656, 93.3%; AI-assisted: 249/270, 92.2%; &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt;=.50) or successful follow-up rate (manual: 2301/2478, 92.9%; AI-assisted: 231/249, 92.8%; &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt;=.96) between the two groups. The time spent on 100 patients in the manual follow-up group was about 9.3 hours. In contrast, the time spent on the AI-assisted follow-up was close to 0 hours. The feedback rate in the AI-assisted follow-up group was higher than that in the manual follow-up group (manual: 68/2656, 2.5%; AI-assisted: 28/270, 10.3%; &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt;&amp;lt;.001). The composition of feedback was different in the two groups. Feedback from the AI-assisted follow-up group mainly included nursing, health education, and hospital environment content, while feedback from the manual follow-up group mostly included medical consultation content. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> The effectiveness of AI-assisted follow-up was not inferior to that of manual follow-up. Human resource costs are saved by AI. AI can help obtain comprehensive feedback from patients, although its depth and pertinence of communication need to be improved. </sec>

Ähnliche Arbeiten