RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Improving emergency department patient-doctor conversation through an artificial intelligence symptom taking tool: an action-oriented design pilot study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.11.13.20230953
DO 10.1101/2020.11.13.20230953
A1 Scheder-Bieschin, Justus
A1 Blümke, Bibiana
A1 de Buijzer, Erwin
A1 Echterdiek, Fabian
A1 Nacsa, Júlia
A1 Ondresik, Marta
A1 Ott, Matthias
A1 Paul, Gregor
A1 Schilling, Tobias
A1 Schmitt, Anne
A1 Wicks, Paul
A1 Gilbert, Stephen
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/11/16/2020.11.13.20230953.abstract
AB IMPORTANCE Communication between patients and healthcare professionals is frequently challenging in the crowded emergency department (ED), with few opportunities to develop rapport or empathy. Digital tools for patients and physicians have been proposed as helpful but their utility is not established.OBJECTIVE To evaluate a patient-facing digital symptom and history taking, as well as handover tool in the waiting room.DESIGN A two-phase, questionnaire-based quality improvement study. Phase I observations guided iterative improvement, which was then further evaluated in Phase II.SETTING ED of a German tertiary referral and major trauma hospital providing interdisciplinary treatment for an average of 120 patients daily.PARTICIPANTS All patients who were willing/able to provide consent, excluding patients: (i) with severe injury/illness requiring immediate treatment; (ii) with traumatic injury; (iii) incapable of completing a health assessment; or, (iv) under 18 years old. Of 1699 patients presenting to the ED, 815 were eligible based on triage level. With available recruitment staff, 135 were approached, of whom 81 were included in the study.INTERVENTION/OBSERVATION Patients entered information into the tool, which generated a handover report to be accessed via a clinician dashboard. All users completed evaluation questionnaires. Clinicians were trained to observationally assess the tool as a prototype, without relying upon it for clinical care.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Patient and clinician Likert scale ratings of tool performance.RESULTS Respondents were strongly positive in endorsing the tool’s usefulness in facilitating conversation (75% of patients, 73% physicians, 100% nurses). Nurses judged the tool as potentially time saving, whilst physicians assessed it as time saving only in some ED medical specialisms (e.g. Surgery). Patients understood the tool questions and reported high usability. The proportion of patients, physicians and nurses who would recommend the tool was 78%, 53% and 76%.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The system has clear potential to improve patient-HCP interaction and make efficiency savings in the ED. Future research and development will extend the range of patients for which the history collection has clinical utility.Question Can a patient-facing digital symptom and clinical history taking tool provide conversational support, aid in symptom taking, facilitate record keeping, and lead to improved rapport between patients, physicians and nurses in the emergency department (ED)?Findings Acceptability was high, with improved rapport experienced 90% of the time for patients, 73% for physicians and 100% for nurses. Nurses assessed the tool as having workflow benefit through potential time saving. Physicians assessed the current tool design as providing time saving in certain ED medical specialisms including Surgery.Meaning The patient-facing tool for symptom and history taking provided meaningful conversation support and showed potential for efficiency savings, however, further research and testing is required before time savings can be consistently delivered to ED clinicians across the range of relevant ED medical specialisms.Competing Interest StatementConflict of Interest Disclosures: Bluemke, Nacsa, Ondresik, Schmitt; Gilbert are employees of Ada Health GmbH and some of the listed hold stock options in the company. Wicks has a consultancy contract with Ada Health GmbH and is an employee of, and owns shares in, Wicks Digital Health. The Ada Health GmbH research team has received research grant funding from Fondation Botnar and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Wicks has received speaker fees from Bayer and honoraria from Roche, ARISLA, AMIA, IMI, PSI, and the BMJ. Funding This study was funded by Ada Health GmbH. Clinical TrialThis is a quality improvement study, which did not collect patient outcomes data, and for this reason registration with a trial registry is not required either in law or by ICMJE guidelines.Funding StatementThis study was funded by Ada Health GmbH.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study was approved by the local ethics committee at the University of Heidelberg (No. S-052-2020).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data is included in the manuscript.