Systematic review to understand users perspectives on AI-enabled decision aids to inform shared decision making

\ua9 The Author(s) 2024.Artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled decision aids can contribute to the shared decision-making process between patients and clinicians through personalised recommendations. This systematic review aims to understand users’ perceptions on using AI-enabled decision aids to inform shared decision-making. Four databases were searched. The population, intervention, comparison, outcomes and study design tool was used to formulate eligibility criteria. Titles, abstracts and full texts were independently screened and PRISMA guidelines followed. A narrative synthesis was conducted. Twenty-six articles were included, with AI-enabled decision aids used for screening and prevention, prognosis, and treatment. Patients found the AI-enabled decision aids easy to understand and user-friendly, fostering a sense of ownership and promoting better adherence to recommended treatment. Clinicians expressed concerns about how up-to-date the information was and the potential for over- or under-treatment. Despite users’ positive perceptions, they also acknowledged certain challenges relating to the usage and risk of bias that would need to be addressed. Registration: PROSPERO database: (CRD42020220320

A Qualitative Study Exploring the Acceptability and Usability of the e-Prescribing Risk and Safety Evaluation (ePRaSE) Assessment Within English Hospitals

Copyright \ua9 2025 The Author(s). Objectives: The e-prescribing risk and safety evaluation (ePRaSE) tool was developed to support the evaluation of hospital e-prescribing (EP) systems. The tool uses fictitious patients alongside previously validated prescribing scenarios to detect whether these systems provide appropriate prescribing advice to users. We sought to evaluate the usability and acceptability of ePRaSE across different EP systems in England. Materials and Methods: NHS hospitals in England with live EP systems were invited to participate. A combination of observations and semi-structured interviews were used to explore participants\u27 perspectives on the acceptability and usability of ePRaSE throughout all stages of the tool development. The data were transcribed verbatim, coded, and analyzed using the Framework Approach. Results: The study was conducted over 2 periods: April-December 2019 and September 2022-January 2023. Thirty-two health care professionals across 22 different NHS hospitals participated in semi-structured interviews (n=25) and 13 observations (n=20) involving 11 different EP systems in total. The ePRaSE assessment was completed in 2 to 3 hours and participants described the tool as easy to use with clinically relevant prescribing tasks. However, some participants experienced difficulties inputting clinical data, such as laboratory results, due to restricted access to different parts of the electronic health record. Many participants suggested areas for further improvement such as capturing a broader range of implemented clinical decision support and requested more detailed feedback on the performance of their systems. Conclusions: EP system users found ePRaSE to be a useful and acceptable tool. Further refinement is desirable, particularly in recording EP system responses and providing detailed results to optimize EP systems for safety benefits

Evaluating the Connect with Pharmacy web-based intervention to reduce hospital readmission for older people

YesBackground The patient transition from a hospital to a post-discharge healthcare setting has potential to disrupt continuity of medication management and increase the risk of harm. “Connect with Pharmacy” is a new electronic web-based transfer of care initiative employed by Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. This allows the sharing of discharge information between the hospital and a patient’s chosen community pharmacy. Objective We investigated whether the timely sharing of discharge information with community pharmacies via “Connect with Pharmacy” reduced hospital readmission rates in older patients. Method To evaluate intervention efficacy, hospital admission data was retrospectively collected. For primary analysis, admission rates were tracked 6-months prior (baseline) and 6-months post-intervention. Secondary measures included effect on total length of stay if readmitted, emergency department attendance and duration, and impact of polypharmacy. Main outcome measure The rate of non-elective hospital readmissions, 6-months post-intervention. Results In the sample (n = 627 patients; Mean age = 81 years), emergency readmission rates following the intervention (M = 1.1, 95% CI [0.98, 1.22]) reduced by 16.16% relative to baseline (M = 1.31, 95% CI [1.21, 1.42]) (W = 54,725; p < 0.001). There was no reduction in total length of stay. Subsidiary analysis revealed a post-intervention reduction in number of days spent in hospital lasting more than three days (χ2 = 13.37, df = 1, p < 0 .001). There were no statistically reliable differences in the remaining secondary measures. Conclusion The results showed a reduction in readmissions and potential post-intervention length of stay, indicating there may be further benefits for our older patients’ experiences and hospital flow

Surgical incidents and their impact on operating theatre staff: qualitative study

Background Surgical incidents can have significant effects on both patients and health professionals, including emotional distress and depression. The aim of this study was to explore the personal and professional impacts of surgical incidents on operating theatre staff. Methods Face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted with a range of different healthcare professionals working in operating theatres, including surgeons and anaesthetists, operating department practitioners, and theatre nurses, and across different surgical specialties at five different hospitals. All interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using an inductive thematic approach, which involved reading and re-reading the transcripts, assigning preliminary codes, and searching for patterns and themes within the codes, with the aid of NVivo 12 software. These emerging themes were discussed with the wider research team to gain their input. Results Some 45 interviews were conducted, generally lasting between 30 and 75 min. Three overarching themes emerged: personal and professional impact; impact of the investigation process; and positive consequences or impact. Participants recalled experiencing negative emotions following surgical incidents that depended on the severity of the incident, patient outcomes, and the support that staff received. A culture of blame, inadequate support, and lack of a clear and transparent investigative process appeared to worsen impact. Conclusion The study indicated that more support is needed for operating theatre staff involved in surgical incidents. Greater transparency and better information during the investigation of such incidents for staff are still needed