The use and future perspective of Artificial Intelligence—A survey among German surgeons

Abstract

PurposeClinical abundance of artificial intelligence has increased significantly in the last decade. This survey aims to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge and acceptance of AI applications among surgeons in Germany.MethodsA total of 357 surgeons from German university hospitals, academic teaching hospitals and private practices were contacted by e-mail and asked to participate in the anonymous survey.ResultsA total of 147 physicians completed the survey. The majority of respondents (n = 85, 52.8%) stated that they were familiar with AI applications in medicine. Personal knowledge was self-rated as average (n = 67, 41.6%) or rudimentary (n = 60, 37.3%) by the majority of participants. On the basis of various application scenarios, it became apparent that the respondents have different demands on AI applications in the area of “diagnosis confirmation” as compared to the area of “therapy decision.” For the latter category, the requirements in terms of the error level are significantly higher and more respondents view their application in medical practice rather critically. Accordingly, most of the participants hope that AI systems will primarily improve diagnosis confirmation, while they see their ethical and legal problems with regard to liability as the main obstacle to extensive clinical application.ConclusionGerman surgeons are in principle positively disposed toward AI applications. However, many surgeons see a deficit in their own knowledge and in the implementation of AI applications in their own professional environment. Accordingly, medical education programs targeting both medical students and healthcare professionals should convey basic knowledge about the development and clinical implementation process of AI applications in different medical fields, including surgery.

Defining medical liability when artificial intelligence is applied on diagnostic algorithms: a systematic review

“…In addition to the clinical setting, the use of AI could assist surgeons during intervention ( 15 ) and lead to more precise and minimally invasive surgical techniques ( 16 ).…”

“…The topic of time emerges also from the surveys of Pecqueux et al ( 16 ), in terms of reduction of time spent by specialists on monotonous tasks, and of Emiroglu et al ( 9 ), in terms of possibility to get to a rapid diagnosis and to examine a larger number of patients. Moreover, AI may filter out non-complex cases letting a greater focus of specialists on more challenging cases ( 18 ).…”

CLASSICA: Validating artificial intelligence in classifying cancer in real time during surgery

“…While some patients have reservations about the use of autonomous AI in their care, many are supportive of its use to aid a human clinician in decision-making capacities [15][16][17]. Surgeons, too, have been found to have mixed views on the technology, with the greatest consensus being found in the use of AI as a decision support tool rather than an autonomous decision-maker [18,19]. Any potential AI solution or support for intra-operative decision-making clearly needs careful evaluation and validation.…”

Prediction of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula using radiomic features and preoperative data

“…The proposed signature was developed using a combination of CT-derived radiomic features and clinical variables. Limited interpretability of predictive machine learning tools has been linked with reduced trust in their performance and consequently, lower practical application 31,32 . Therefore, we explored associations between clinically validated CR-POPF risk factors and relevant radiomic features.…”