OpenAlex · Aktualisierung stündlich · Letzte Aktualisierung: 05.05.2026, 02:44

Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.

Early Insights Among Emergency Medicine Physicians on Artificial Intelligence: A National, Convenience-sample Survey of the American College of Emergency Physicians

2025·0 Zitationen·Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians OpenOpen Access
Volltext beim Verlag öffnen

0

Zitationen

9

Autoren

2025

Jahr

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the current utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) tools among emergency physicians, their attitudes toward AI in clinical practice, and how a national physician professional organization could best support its members regarding AI. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was emailed to American College of Emergency Physicians members and made available to conference attendees at a national symposium. The survey collected demographic information, details on the use of noninstitutional and institutional AI tools, attitudes toward AI, and desired forms of support. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Results: A total of 658 physicians responded, primarily practicing attendings (78%) and residents (9%), with 60% aged 35 to 54 years and 67% identifying as male; these respondents represented 2% of the membership of American College of Emergency Physicians. Noninstitutional AI tool use (eg, ChatGPT and independent electrocardiogram interpretation) was reported by 31% of respondents. Institutional AI was integrated into 52% of respondents' practices, with 18% regularly using ambient AI documentation and 22% using AI-assisted clinical decision support. AI tools for point-of-care ultrasound were available to 10%, and AI-assisted radiology interpretation was used by 14%, mainly for X-rays and computed tomography. Operational AI for triage, capacity management, and staff optimization were reported by 15%, while 9% used AI-assisted coding and billing. Moreover, 75% believed AI improves clinical efficiency, 57% felt it enhanced care quality, but 12% expressed concern about job displacement, 16% are unsure whether AI tools would adequately comply with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations, and 38% noted potential biases. About half desire educational support and guidelines. Conclusion: In this nonrepresentative emergency physician survey, respondents reported moderate rates of adoption of AI tools and generally positive attitudes toward AI's impact on efficiency and care quality. However, respondents also reported important concerns about job displacement, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulation compliance, and potential biases. Larger studies are needed to more fully understand emergency physician views on AI.

Ähnliche Arbeiten