An observational study of over 1,400 colonoscopies found that the rate at which experienced health professionals detected precancerous growths in the colon decreased by 20% (from 28.4% to 22.4%) in non-AI-assisted colonoscopies several months after the routine introduction of AI.
Several studies have suggested that AI assistance may help doctors identify certain cancers; however, this is the first study to suggest that the implementation of AI could lead to a reduction in the ability of medical professionals to impact health outcomes, which are crucial to patients.
Authors highlight the limits due to the observational nature of their study and call for further research into how AI affects healthcare professionals’ abilities and ways to prevent loss of skills.
The introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) to assist colonoscopies is linked to a reduction in the ability of endoscopists (health professionals who perform colonoscopies) to detect precancerous growths (adenomas) in the colon without AI assistance, according to a paper published in The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology journal.
Colonoscopy enables the detection and removal of adenomas, leading to the prevention of bowel cancer. Numerous trials have shown that the use of AI to assist colonoscopies increases the detection of adenomas, generating much enthusiasm for the technology. However, there is a lack of research into how continuous use of AI affects endoscopist skills, with suggestions that it could be either positive, by training clinicians, or negative, leading to a reduction in skills.
Author Dr Marcin Romańczyk, Academy of Silesia (Poland), says, “To our knowledge, this is the first study to suggest a negative impact of regular AI use on healthcare professionals’ ability to complete a patient-relevant task in medicine of any kind. Our results are concerning, given that the adoption of AI in medicine is rapidly spreading. We urgently need more research into the impact of AI on health professionals’ skills across different medical fields. We need to find out which factors may cause or contribute to problems when healthcare professionals and AI systems don’t work well together, and to develop ways to fix or improve these interactions.”
The study took place at four colonoscopy centres in Poland between September 2021 and March 2022. Regular AI use was introduced at the centres at the end of 2021, after which colonoscopies were randomly done either with or without AI assistance. During this time, 1,443 colonoscopies were conducted without AI; 795 before the introduction of regular AI use and 648 after AI implementation. The colonoscopies were performed by 19 experienced endoscopists who had conducted over 2,000 colonoscopies each.
The average rate of adenoma detection in non-AI-assisted colonoscopies significantly decreased from 28.4% (226/795) before AI exposure to 22.4% (145/648) after AI exposure, corresponding to a 20% relative and 6% absolute reduction in adenoma detection rate. In the AI-assisted colonoscopies, the adenoma detection rate was 25.3% (186/734).
Author Prof Yuichi Mori, University of Oslo (Norway), says, “These results pose an interesting question about previous randomised controlled trials, which found AI-assisted colonoscopy enabled a higher adenoma detection rate than non-AI-assisted colonoscopy. It could be the case that non-AI-assisted colonoscopy assessed in these trials is different from standard non-AI-assisted colonoscopy, as the endoscopists in the trials may have been negatively affected by continuous AI exposure.”
The authors acknowledge some limitations, including that the observational nature of the study means that factors other than the implementation of AI use may have influenced the findings. Additionally, as the study was conducted with experienced endoscopists, this may limit its generalisation to all endoscopists. Further studies with less experienced health professionals are needed to see if long-term AI tool use has a larger impact on their ability to detect adenomas without AI.
Genetic testing can transform surgical decisions and family risk assessment. New tools are making it easier for all clinicians to integrate testing without specialist referrals.
Listen Now | Exclusive to The Oncology Network
Writing in a linked Comment, Dr Omer Ahmad, University College London, who was not involved in the study, said: “These findings temper the current enthusiasm for rapid adoption of AI-based technologies […] and highlight the importance of carefully considering possible unintended clinical consequences. Although previous experimental studies have alluded to negative modification of behaviour after AI exposure, the study by Budzyń and colleagues provides the first real-world clinical evidence for the phenomenon of deskilling, potentially affecting patient-related outcomes. […] Although AI continues to offer great promise to enhance clinical outcomes, we must also safeguard against the quiet erosion of fundamental skills required for high-quality endoscopy.”
Source: The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology
