Patient-Centered Pain Care Using Artificial Intelligence and Mobile Health Tools

Abstract

IMPORTANCECognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain (CBT-CP) is a safe and effective alternative to opioid analgesics. Because CBT-CP requires multiple sessions and therapists are scarce, many patients have limited access or fail to complete treatment.OBJECTIVES To determine if a CBT-CP program that personalizes patient treatment using reinforcement learning, a field of artificial intelligence (AI), and interactive voice response (IVR) calls is noninferior to standard telephone CBT-CP and saves therapist time. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis was a randomized noninferiority, comparative effectiveness trial including 278 patients with chronic back pain from the Department of Veterans Affairs health system (recruitment and data collection from July 11, 2017-April 9, 2020). More patients were randomized to the AI-CBT-CP group than to the control (1.4:1) to maximize the system's ability to learn from patient interactions.INTERVENTIONS All patients received 10 weeks of CBT-CP. For the AI-CBT-CP group, patient feedback via daily IVR calls was used by the AI engine to make weekly recommendations for either a 45-minute or 15-minute therapist-delivered telephone session or an individualized IVR-delivered therapist message. Patients in the comparison group were offered 10 therapist-delivered telephone CBT-CP sessions (45 minutes/session). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ; range 0-24), measured at 3 months (primary end point) and 6 months. Secondary outcomes included pain intensity and pain interference. Consensus guidelines were used to identify clinically meaningful improvements for responder analyses (eg, a 30% improvement in RMDQ scores and pain intensity). Data analyses were performed from April 2021 to May 2022. RESULTSThe study population included 278 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.9 [12.2] years; 248 [89.2%] men; 225 [81.8%] White individuals). The 3-month mean RMDQ score difference between AI-CBT-CP and standard CBT-CP was −0.72 points (95% CI, −2.06 to 0.62) and the 6-month difference was -1.24 (95% CI, -2.48 to 0); noninferiority criterion were met at both the 3-and 6-month end points (P < .001 for both). A greater proportion of patients receiving AI-CBT-CP had clinically meaningful improvements at 6 months as indicated by RMDQ (37% vs 19%; P = .01) and pain intensity scores (29% vs 17%; P = .03). There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes. Pain therapy using AI-CBT-CP required less than half of the therapist time as standard CBT-CP. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThe findings of this randomized comparative effectiveness trial indicated that AI-CBT-CP was noninferior to therapist-delivered telephone CBT-CP and required substantially less therapist time. Interventions like AI-CBT-CP could allow many more patients to be served effectively by CBT-CP programs using the same number of therapists.

Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating AI in Clinical Practice: A Scoping Evaluation

“…The five trials with non-inferiority designs established that there was no significant difference between standalone AI and clinicians (three trials) and between assisted unassisted clinicians (two trials). 8,12,18–20 Hence, a total of 69 trials out of 84 (82·1%) have reported a positive result for their primary endpoint. A similar success rate was observed for the gastroenterology subset, with 27 of the 35 trials reporting significant improvement and one trial demonstrating noninferiority for an overall 80·0% success rate.…”

Prehabilitation for general surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

“…The most notable example is artificial intelligence, which is already demonstrating potential benefits for surgical systems, 66 in particular those for general surgery. [67][68][69] For prehabilitation interventions specifically, artificial intelligence could assist with intervention personalisation according to patient characteristics and preferences, enhancement of information provision and experience for potentially improved adherence, 70 predictive metrics to allow for early modulation of interventions when required, 71 and decision aids 72 for both clinicians and patients. In studies that have drawn broad media attention, artificial intelligence chatbots have shown high levels of quality and empathy when providing clinical solutions for patient issues, 73 and these could potentially enhance patient communication approaches within prehabilitation interventions before general surgery.…”

Characteristics of Artificial Intelligence Clinical Trials in the Field of Healthcare: A Cross-Sectional Study on ClinicalTrials.gov

“…Another two comparative effectiveness studies aimed to confirm the feasibility and effectiveness of the mobile programs in the intervention treatment of depression and anxiety disorders (NCT02176226) and chronic pain (NCT02464449). The studies found that the introduction of ML and RL algorithms could facilitate the personalized formulation and adjustment of patient interventions, significantly improve patient compliance, and reduce the treatment time and labor costs compared with traditional treatment [ 64 , 65 , 66 ].…”