Beliefs, experiences and concerns of using artificial intelligence in healthcare: A qualitative synthesis.

Objective: Artificial intelligence (AI) is a developing field in the context of healthcare. As this technology continues to be implemented in patient care, there is a growing need to understand the thoughts and experiences of stakeholders in this area to ensure that future AI development and implementation is successful. The aim of this study was to conduct a literature search of qualitative studies exploring the opinions of stakeholders such as clinicians, patients, and technology experts in order to establish the most common themes and ideas that have been presented in this research. Methods: A literature search was conducted of existing qualitative research on stakeholder beliefs about the use of AI use in healthcare. Twenty-one papers were selected and analysed resulting in the development of four key themes relating to patient care, patient-doctor relationships, lack of education and resources, and the need for regulations. Results: Overall, patients and healthcare workers are open to the use of AI in care and appear positive about potential benefits. However, concerns were raised relating to the lack of empathy in interactions of AI tools, and potential risks that may arise from the data collection needed for AI use and development. Stakeholders in the healthcare, technology, and business sectors all stressed that there was a lack of appropriate education, funding, and guidelines surrounding AI, and these concerns needed to be addressed to ensure future implementation is safe and suitable for patient care. Conclusion: Ultimately, the results found in this study highlighted that there was a need for communication between stakeholder in order for these concerns to be addressed, mitigate potential risks, and maximise benefits for patients and clinicians alike. The results also identified a need for further qualitative research in this area to further understand stakeholder experiences as AI use continues to develop.

Experiences of using artificial intelligence in healthcare: a qualitative study of UK clinician and key stakeholder perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: Artificial intelligence (AI) is a rapidly developing field in healthcare, with tools being developed across various specialties to support healthcare professionals and reduce workloads. It is important to understand the experiences of professionals working in healthcare to ensure that future AI tools are acceptable and effectively implemented. The aim of this study was to gain an in-depth understanding of the experiences and perceptions of UK healthcare workers and other key stakeholders about the use of AI in the National Health Service (NHS). DESIGN: A qualitative study using semistructured interviews conducted remotely via MS Teams. Thematic analysis was carried out. SETTING: NHS and UK higher education institutes. PARTICIPANTS: Thirteen participants were recruited, including clinical and non-clinical participants working for the NHS and researchers working to develop AI tools for healthcare settings. RESULTS: Four core themes were identified: positive perceptions of AI; potential barriers to using AI in healthcare; concerns regarding AI use and steps needed to ensure the acceptability of future AI tools. Overall, we found that those working in healthcare were generally open to the use of AI and expected it to have many benefits for patients and facilitate access to care. However, concerns were raised regarding the security of patient data, the potential for misdiagnosis and that AI could increase the burden on already strained healthcare staff. CONCLUSION: This study found that healthcare staff are willing to engage with AI research and incorporate AI tools into care pathways. Going forward, the NHS and AI developers will need to collaborate closely to ensure that future tools are suitable for their intended use and do not negatively impact workloads or patient trust. Future AI studies should continue to incorporate the views of key stakeholders to improve tool acceptability. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05028179; ISRCTN15113915; IRAS ref: 293515.

PROTEUS Study: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Stress Echocardiography.

BACKGROUND: Stress echocardiography (SE) is one of the most commonly used diagnostic imaging tests for coronary artery disease (CAD) but requires clinicians to visually assess scans to identify patients who may benefit from invasive investigation and treatment. EchoGo Pro provides an automated interpretation of SE based on artificial intelligence (AI) image analysis. In reader studies, use of EchoGo Pro when making clinical decisions improves diagnostic accuracy and confidence. Prospective evaluation in real world practice is now important to understand the impact of EchoGo Pro on the patient pathway and outcome. METHODS: PROTEUS is a randomized, multicenter, 2-armed, noninferiority study aiming to recruit 2,500 participants from National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in the UK referred to SE clinics for investigation of suspected CAD. All participants will undergo a stress echocardiogram protocol as per local hospital policy. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to a control group, representing current practice, or an intervention group, in which clinicians will receive an AI image analysis report (EchoGo Pro, Ultromics Ltd, Oxford, UK) to use during image interpretation, indicating the likelihood of severe CAD. The primary outcome will be appropriateness of clinician decision to refer for coronary angiography. Secondary outcomes will assess other health impacts including appropriate use of other clinical management approaches, impact on variability in decision making, patient and clinician qualitative experience and a health economic analysis. DISCUSSION: This will be the first study to assess the impact of introducing an AI medical diagnostic aid into the standard care pathway of patients with suspected CAD being investigated with SE. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT05028179, registered on 31 August 2021; ISRCTN: ISRCTN15113915; IRAS ref: 293515; REC ref: 21/NW/0199.

Identifying Child Anxiety Through Schools-identification to intervention (iCATS-i2i): protocol for single-arm feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: Anxiety disorders are common among primary-school aged children, but few affected children receive evidence-based treatment. Identifying and supporting children who experience anxiety problems through schools would address substantial treatment access barriers that families and school staff often face. We have worked with families and school staff to co-design procedures that incorporate screening, feedback for parents, and the offer of a brief intervention in primary schools. This study sets out to assess the feasibility of a subsequent school-based cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate these procedures. Our objectives are to ensure our procedures for identifying and supporting children with anxiety difficulties through primary schools are acceptable and there are no negative impacts, to estimate recruitment and retention rates, and to identify any changes needed to study procedures or measures. METHODS: We will recruit six primary/junior schools in England (2 classes per school), and invite all children (aged 8-9) (n = 360) and their parent/carer and class teacher in participating classes to take part. Children, parents and class teachers will complete questionnaires at baseline and 12-week follow-up. Children who 'screen positive' on a 2-item parent-report child anxiety screen at baseline will be the target population (expected n = 43). Parents receive feedback on screening questionnaire responses, and where the child screens positive the family is offered support (OSI: Online Support and Intervention for child anxiety). OSI is a brief, parent-led online intervention, supported by short telephone sessions with a Children's Wellbeing Practitioner. Participants' experiences of study procedures will be assessed through qualitative interviews/discussion groups. DISCUSSION: Evidence-based procedures for identifying and supporting children with anxiety difficulties through primary schools would improve children's access to timely, effective intervention for anxiety difficulties. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN30032471 . Retrospectively registered on 18 May 2021.

School-based screening for childhood anxiety problems and intervention delivery: a codesign approach.

OBJECTIVES: A very small proportion of children with anxiety problems receive evidence-based treatment. Barriers to access include difficulties with problem identification, concerns about stigma and a lack of clarity about how to access specialist services and their limited availability. A school-based programme that integrates screening to identify those children who are most likely to be experiencing anxiety problems with the offer of intervention has the potential to overcome many of these barriers. This article is a process-based account of how we used codesign to develop a primary school-based screening and intervention programme for child anxiety problems. DESIGN: Codesign. SETTING: UK primary schools. PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected from year 4 children (aged 8-9 years), parents, school staff and mental health practitioners. RESULTS: We report how the developed programme was experienced and perceived by a range of users, including parents, children, school staff and mental health practitioners, as well as how the programme was adapted following user feedback. CONCLUSIONS: We reflect on the mitigation techniques we employed, the lessons learnt from the codesign process and give recommendations that may inform the development and implementation of future school-based screening and intervention programmes.

The ASCEND study: protocol for a feasibility study to evaluate an early social communication intervention for young children with Down syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Down syndrome is the most common cause of learning disability, affecting approximately 1 in every 700 babies. Children with Down syndrome have particular difficulties with speech and language. This makes it challenging for them to participate fully in life, access healthcare services and educational opportunities. Improving the language skills of young children with Down syndrome is vital for their future social and emotional well-being and behaviour, and consequently contribution to society. As Down syndrome is detected before or at birth, we can provide support from early on. There are currently no standard interventions for improving the language skills of children with Down syndrome under the age of 36 months. Evidence suggests that early parent-based interventions may be effective in improving language outcomes. In partnership with parents and speech and language therapists, we have co-developed an intervention focusing on early social communication skills and our preliminary work shows that it can lead to better language in children with Down syndrome. Our aim is to carry out a feasibility study which will inform a future pilot/full trial to test whether the intervention is effective in improving language skills before children with Down syndrome start school. METHODS: This is a two-arm feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT), with 1:1 randomisation stratified by trial site comparing the intervention (plus standard NHS speech and language therapy) with no intervention (standard NHS speech and language therapy only). We aim to recruit between 25 and 30 children with Down syndrome aged between 11 and 36 months. Sites are defined by the geographical boundaries of three National Health Service (NHS) Trusts. Recruitment is from NHS Speech and Language Therapist caseloads within the 3 Trusts, and self-referral. In the intervention arm, parents/guardians will receive brief training on the parent-based intervention and a manual to follow with their child for 10 weeks. The children's language and early communication skills and family health outcomes will be assessed by a blinded assessor at baseline, post-intervention and 6 month follow-up. Questionnaire and semi-structured interviews will explore the acceptability of the intervention to parents and SLTs. DISCUSSION: The feasibility study's outcomes will determine whether it would be viable to progress to a full-trial and whether adjustments need to made to the procedures, data collection methods, intervention delivery and the intensity of support needed. We want to assess whether our early intervention can be delivered and rolled out through NHS Speech and Language Therapy (SLT) Services. We anticipate that NHS SLT Services will need to make ongoing changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic, so it is likely that we will need to make adjustments for the definitive trial. We will also calculate descriptive statistics of the language outcome measure which we will use for any future sample size calculation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN13902755. Registered on 25 August 2020. http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN13902755.

Codesign and development of a primary school based pathway for child anxiety screening and intervention delivery: a protocol, mixed-methods feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Anxiety difficulties are among the most common mental health problems in childhood. Despite this, few children access evidence-based interventions, and school may be an ideal setting to improve children's access to treatment. This article describes the design, methods and expected data collection of the Identifying Child Anxiety Through Schools - Identification to Intervention (iCATS i2i) study, which aims to develop acceptable school-based procedures to identify and support child anxiety difficulties. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: iCATS i2i will use a mixed-methods approach to codesign and deliver a set of procedures-or 'pathway'-to improve access to evidence-based intervention for child anxiety difficulties through primary schools in England. The study will consist of four stages, initially involving in-depth interviews with parents, children, school staff and stakeholders (stage 1) to inform the development of the pathway. The pathway will then be administered in two primary schools, including screening, feedback to parents and the offer of treatment where indicated (stage 2), with participating children, parents and school staff invited to provide feedback on their experience (stages 3 and 4). Data will be analysed using Template Analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The iCATS i2i study was approved by the University of Oxford's Research Ethics Committee (REF R64620/RE001). It is expected that this codesign study will lead on to a future feasibility study and, if indicated, a randomised controlled trial. The findings will be disseminated in several ways, including via lay summary report, publication in academic journals and presentation at conferences. By providing information on child, parent, school staff and other stakeholder's experiences, we anticipate that the findings will inform the development of an acceptable evidence-based pathway for identification and intervention for children with anxiety difficulties in primary schools and may also inform broader approaches to screening for and treating youth mental health problems outside of clinics.

An open randomised study of autoinflation in 4- to 11-year-old school children with otitis media with effusion in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Otitis media with effusion (OME) is a very common problem in primary care, but one that lacks an evidence-based non-surgical treatment. OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical effectiveness of nasal balloon autoinflation for the treatment of OME in children. DESIGN: A pragmatic, two-arm, open randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Forty-three general practices from 17 UK primary care trusts recruited between January 2012 and February 2013. PARTICIPANTS: School children aged 4-11 years with a history of OME symptoms or related concerns in the previous 3 months, and a type B tympanogram, diagnostic of a middle ear effusion, in one or both ears. INTERVENTION: Three hundred and twenty children were randomised, 160 to each group, using independent web-based computer-generated randomisation (with minimisation based on age, sex and baseline severity of OME) to either nasal balloon autoinflation performed three times per day for 1-3 months plus usual care, or usual care alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of children demonstrating clearance of middle ear fluid in at least one ear (with normal tympanograms) at 1 and 3 months, assessed blind to treatment. An ear-related measure of quality of life (QoL) [a 14-point questionnaire on the impact of OME (OMQ-14)], weekly diary recorded symptoms, compliance and adverse events were all secondary outcomes. RESULTS: At 1 month, the proportion of children with normal tympanograms was 47.3% (62/131) in those allocated to autoinflation and 35.6% (47/132) in those receiving usual care [adjusted relative risk (RR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99 to 1.88]. At 3 months, the proportions were 49.6% (62/125) and 38.3% (46/120), respectively (adjusted RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.83; number needed to treat = 9). The change in OMQ-14 also favoured the intervention arm (adjusted global score difference -0.42; p = 0.001). Reported compliance was good: 89% in the first month and 80% in months 2 and 3. Adverse events included otalgia in 4% of treated children compared with 1% in the control group. Minor nosebleeds (14% vs. 15%) and respiratory tract infections (18% vs. 13%) were noted. CONCLUSION: We found the use of autoinflation in young children with OME to be feasible in primary care and effective in both clearing effusions and improving child and parent ear-related QoL and symptoms. This method has scope to be used more widely. Further research is needed for very young children, and to inform prudent use in different health settings.

Oral corticosteroid use for clinical and cost-effective symptom relief of sore throat: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Management of acute sore throat poses a significant burden on UK general practices, with almost 10% of registered patients attending their GP with sore throat every year. Nearly half of all patients presenting with acute sore throat are treated with antibiotics, despite their limited effect. In a recent systematic review we demonstrated that a single dose of steroids reduced the severity and time to resolution of sore throat. However, all of the trials included looked at the use of steroids alongside antibiotics and only one was in a primary care setting. This trial aims to assess the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a single oral dose of corticosteroids on symptoms of sore throat in patients receiving either a delayed antibiotic prescription or no antibiotics at all in UK primary care. METHODS/DESIGN: A double-blind, two arm, randomized, placebo controlled trial in adults (≥ 18 years of age) presenting to primary care with acute sore throat (