Artificial intelligence-enabled tools in cardiovascular medicine: A survey of current use, perceptions, and challenges.

Background: Numerous artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled tools for cardiovascular diseases have been published, with a high impact on public health. However, few have been adopted into, or have meaningfully affected, routine clinical care. Objective: To evaluate current awareness, perceptions, and clinical use of AI-enabled digital health tools for patients with cardiovascular disease, and challenges to adoption. Methods: This mixed-methods study included interviews with 12 cardiologists and 8 health information technology (IT) administrators, and a follow-on survey of 90 cardiologists and 30 IT administrators. Results: We identified 5 major challenges: (1) limited knowledge, (2) insufficient usability, (3) cost constraints, (4) poor electronic health record interoperability, and (5) lack of trust. A minority of cardiologists were using AI tools; more were prepared to implement AI tools, but their sophistication level varied greatly. Conclusion: Most respondents believe in the potential of AI-enabled tools to improve care quality and efficiency, but they identified several fundamental barriers to wide-scale adoption.

Perspectives of Patients With Cancer on the Quality-Adjusted Life Year as a Measure of Value in Healthcare.

OBJECTIVES: Healthcare expenditures in the United States continue to grow; to control costs, there has been a shift away from volume-focused care to value-based care. The incorporation of patient perspectives in the development of value-based healthcare is critical, yet research addressing this issue is limited. This study explores awareness and understanding of patients with cancer about the quality-adjusted life year (QALY), as well as their perspectives regarding the use of the QALY to measure value in healthcare. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used survey methodology to explore patient awareness, understanding, and perspectives on the QALY. A total of 774 patients with cancer and survivors completed this survey in June and July of 2017. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Results showed that there is limited awareness of the QALY among patients with cancer and survivors and minimal understanding of how the QALY is used. Only one quarter of respondents believed that the QALY was a good way to measure value in healthcare. Some participants (5%) stated that the QALY could be personally helpful to them in their own decision making, indicating the possible usefulness of the QALY as a decision aid in cancer care. Nevertheless, participants expressed concern about other decision makers using the QALY to allocate cancer care and resources and maintained a strong desire for autonomy over personal healthcare choices. CONCLUSIONS: Although participants believed that the QALY could help them make more informed decisions, there was concern about how it would be used by payers, policymakers, and other decision makers in determining access to care. Implications for policy and research are discussed.

Understanding the experience of living with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: As non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatments improve and patients live longer, it is important to develop interventions to help patients live fuller lives. We sought to identify key components of quality of life (QOL) in determining therapeutic decision making and overall value of life extension in patients with NSCLC. METHODS: Three focus groups (n = 16) and telephone interviews (n = 15) were conducted with NSCLC patients (N = 31) to explore symptoms considered important to QOL. A trade-off format was used to assess the value of life extension relative to QOL. Patients were asked to consider a hypothetical treatment option offering a modest (3 month) life extension. RESULTS: Patients' mean age was 61.6 years, 67.6% were women, 77.4% were white, and 48.4% had stage III/IV disease. In all, 68% of patients conceptualized emotions as symptoms of NSCLC. Key symptoms changed over time: Patients reported feeling shock and fear at diagnosis (74%), and feeling fear or loneliness during the beginning of therapy (55%). Additionally, patients who reported successfully connecting with other NSCLC patients (peers), support groups, and/or community members reported a positive shift in feelings (52%) as they continued therapy or moved into a posttherapy phase. Financially, 23% of patients reported being adversely affected by copayments, 36% by unexpected gaps in coverage, and 39% by other bills. Patients reported that the most important dimension driving their decision making about life-extending therapy was somatic (84%), followed by functional (32%), relational (23%), and emotional (10%) dimensions. LIMITATIONS: Study participants were likely to have received some education or support from the recruiting cancer advocacy and patient education/support organizations. In addition, participants were of a higher socioeconomic status than the average lung cancer patient population. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with NSCLC conflated emotional well-being after diagnosis with symptoms of their cancer and treatment toxicities. Somatic QOL concerns emerged ahead of functional, emotional, and relational QOL concerns as the dominant driver of therapeutic decision making. FUNDING: This study was funded by Daiichi Sankyo Inc.