AI provides congruent and prescriptive feedback for squat form: qualitative assessment of coaching provided by AI and physical therapist.

Objectives: To assess style and themes of feedback provided by artificial intelligence (AI) mobile application and physical therapist (PT) to participants during bodyweight squat exercise. Methods: Research population was age 20-35, without any pre-existing condition that precluded participation in bodyweight exercise. Qualitative methodology followed directed content analysis. Cohen's kappa coefficient verified consistency between coders. Results: Both AI and PT groups had seven female and eight male participants. Three themes emerged: affirmation schema, correction paradigms and physical assessments. Average kappa coefficient calculated for all codes was 0.96, a value that indicates almost perfect agreement. Conclusion: Themes generated highlight the AI focus on congruent, descriptive and prescriptive feedback, while the PT demonstrated multipoint improvement capabilities. Further research should establish feedback comparisons with multiple PTs and correlate qualitative data with additional quantitative data on performance outcomes based on feedback.

Artificial intelligence application versus physical therapist for squat evaluation: a randomized controlled trial.

Artificial intelligence technology is becoming more prevalent in health care as a tool to improve practice patterns and patient outcomes. This study assessed ability of a commercialized artificial intelligence (AI) mobile application to identify and improve bodyweight squat form in adult participants when compared to a physical therapist (PT). Participants randomized to AI group (n = 15) performed 3 squat sets: 10 unassisted control squats, 10 squats with performance feedback from AI, and 10 additional unassisted test squats. Participants randomized to PT group (n = 15) also performed 3 identical sets, but instead received performance feedback from PT. AI group intervention did not differ from PT group (log ratio of two odds ratios = - 0.462, 95% confidence interval (CI) (- 1.394, 0.471), p = 0.332). AI ability to identify a correct squat generated sensitivity 0.840 (95% CI (0.753, 0.901)), specificity 0.276 (95% CI (0.191, 0.382)), PPV 0.549 (95% CI (0.423, 0.669)), NPV 0.623 (95% CI (0.436, 0.780)), and accuracy 0.565 95% CI (0.477, 0.649)). There was no statistically significant association between group allocation and improved squat performance. Current AI had satisfactory ability to identify correct squat form and limited ability to identify incorrect squat form, which reduced diagnostic capabilities.Trial Registration NCT04624594, 12/11/2020, retrospectively registered.

Critical patient insights from the same-day feedback programme at Stanford Health Care.

PATIENT-CENTERED ORGANISATIONS: Healthcare organisations now integrate patient feedback into value-based compensation formulas. This research considered Stanford Healthcare's same-day feedback, a programme designed to evaluate the patient experience. Specifically, how did patients with cancer interviewed in the programme assess their physicians? Furthermore, how did assessments differ across emotional, physical, practical and informational needs when interviewed by volunteer patient and family partners (PAFPs) versus hospital staff? PATIENT-PHYSICIAN COMMUNICATION BARRIERS: Integral to this research was Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT), which suggests individuals adjust interactions based on conversational roles, needs and understanding. Previous influential research was conducted by Frosch et al (2012) and Di Bartolo et al (2017), who revealed barriers to patient-physician communication, and Baker et al (2011) who associated CAT with these interactions. However, we still did not know if patients alter physician assessments between interviewers. VOLUNTEERS COLLECT PATIENT NEEDS: This mixed methods study worked with 190 oncology unit patient interviews from 2009 to 2017. Open-ended interview responses underwent thematic analysis. When compared with hospital staff, PAFPs collected more practical and informational needs from patients. PAFPs also collected more verbose responses that resembled detailed narratives of the patients' hospital experiences. This study contributed insightful patient perspectives of physician care in a novel hospital programme.