. These are patients aren’t quite sick enough to require hospitalization in the Intensive Care Unit, but whose conditions might deteriorate rapidly with minimal warning. The AI systems monitored the patients’ vital signs, heart rhythm, laboratory results, and nurse observations. The patients were divided into two groups—those monitored with AI vs. those monitored by traditional methods.
The researchers found that patients whose vital signs were monitored with the AI were 43% more likely to receive medications to support the heart and circulatory system compared to patients monitored by traditional methods. Furthermore, the patients monitored with AI had a, “We think of these as ‘augmented intelligence’ tools that speed in-person clinical evaluations by our physicians and nurses and prompt the treatments that keep our patients safer.
I don’t think AI is close to being ready to replace human physicians. Recently, Google’s AI Overview was lambasted forto patient queries. For example, when the Google AI was asked, “how many rocks should I eat?” it recommended eating “” and suggesting hiding “loose rocks in foods like peanut butter and ice cream.” The faulty answer was apparently drawn in part from
But in the right hands, AI can definitely augment human physicians, who can’t always keep up with all the nuances of the latest literature. AI systems won’t be limited by the need to sleep, eat, or tend to their personal lives. Already, many doctors rely on “physician extenders” such as nurse practitioners or physician assistants to help with busy workloads.