Medical Ethics and Artificial Intelligence in Neurosurgery-How Should We Prepare?

BACKGROUND: The development of artificial intelligence (AI) raises ethical concerns about its side effects on the attitudes and behaviors of clinicians and medical practitioners. The authors aim to understand the medical ethics of AI-based chatbots and to suggest coping strategies for an emerging landscape of increased access and potential ambiguity using AI. METHODS: This study examines the medical ethics of AI-based chatbots (Chat generative pretrained transformer [GPT], Bing Chat, and Google's Bard) using multiple-choice questions. ChatGPT and Bard correctly answered all questions (5/5), while Bing Chat correctly answered only 3 of 5 questions. ChatGPT explained answers simply. Bing Chat explained answers with references, and Bard provided additional explanations with details. RESULTS: AI has the potential to revolutionize medical fields by improving diagnosis accuracy, surgical planning, and treatment outcomes. By analyzing large amounts of data, AI can identify patterns and make predictions, aiding neurosurgeons in making informed decisions for increased patient wellbeing. As AI usage increases, the number of cases involving AI-entrusted judgments will rise, leading to the gradual emergence of ethical issues across interdisciplinary fields. The medical field will be no exception. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests the need for safety measures to regulate medical ethics in the context of advancing AI. A system should be developed to verify and predict pertinent issues.

The Prevalence of Financial Conflict of Interest Disclosures by Endovascular Specialists on X (Twitter).

PURPOSE: To evaluate conflicts of interest (COIs) among interventional radiologists and related specialties who mention specific devices or companies on the social media (SoMe) platform X, formerly Twitter. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 13,809 posts between October 7, 2021, and December 31, 2021, on X were evaluated. Posts by U.S. interventional radiologists and related specialties who mentioned a specific device or company were identified. A positive COI was defined as receiving a payment from the device manufacturer or company within 36 months prior to posting. The Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payment database was used to identify financial payments. The prevalence and value of COIs were assessed and compared between posts mentioning a device or company and a paired control group using descriptive statistics and chi-squared tests and independent t tests. RESULTS: Eighty posts containing the mention of 100 specific devices or companies were evaluated. COIs were present in 53% (53/100). When mentioning a specific device or product, 40% interventional radiologists had a COI, compared with 62% neurosurgeons. Physicians who mentioned a specific device or company were 3.7 times more likely to have a positive COI relative to the paired control group (53/100 vs 14/100; P < .001). Of the 31 physicians with a COI, the median physician received $2,270. None of the positive COIs were disclosed. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians posting on SoMe about a specific device or company were more likely to have a financial COI than authors of posts not mentioning a specific device or company. No disclosure of any COI was present in the posts, limiting followers' ability to weigh potential bias.

Sales Representatives in the Operating Room: Conflict of Interest or Clinical Support?

BACKGROUND: The Physician Payment Sunshine Act, which became federal law in January 2012, mandated that medical device manufacturers must disclose any financial support provided to individual physicians on a publicly available Web site. The law reflects increasing concern about physician-industry relationships. METHODS: The connection between surgeon and sales representative creates possibilities for both financial and non-financial conflicts of interest (COIs). Indeed, COIs may be inherent when a sales representative is motivated by profit while also serving a critical role in many surgeries. RESULTS: The potential benefits and risks for patients, who may not even be aware of the sales representative's presence in the operating room, must be considered. CONCLUSIONS: This paper adds to the national discussion about neurosurgical physician-industry conflicts of interests and the issues relative to sales representatives in the operating room.

Should neurosurgeons continue to work in the absence of personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 era?

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a widespread shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE). Many healthcare workers, including neurosurgeons, have expressed concern about how to safely and adequately perform their medical responsibilities in these challenging circumstances. One of these concerns revolves around the pressing question: should providers continue to work in the absence of adequate PPE? Although the first peak of the COVID-19 crisis seems to have subsided and supply of PPE has increased, concerns about insufficient PPE availability remain. Inconsistent supply, limited efficacy, and continued high demand for PPE, combined with the continued threat of a second COVID-19 wave, mean that the issues surrounding PPE availability remain unresolved, including a duty to work. This paper offers an ethical investigation of whether neurosurgeons should perform their professional responsibilities with limited availability of PPE. We evaluate ethical considerations and conflicting duties and thereby hope to facilitate providers in making a well-considered personal and moral decision about this challenging issue.

Characteristics of Reported Industry Payments to Neurosurgeons: A 5-Year Open Payments Database Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to characterize the payments made by medical industry to neurosurgeons from 2014 to 2018. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2018 of the Open Payments Database. Collected data included the total number of industry payments, the aggregate value of industry payments, and the mean value of each industry payment made to neurosurgeons per year over the 5-year period. RESULTS: A total of 105,150 unique surgeons, with 13,668 (12.99%) unique neurosurgeons, were identified to have received an industry payment during 2014-2018. Neurosurgeons were the second highest industry-paid surgical specialty, with a total 421,151 industry payments made to neurosurgeons, totaling $477,451,070. The mean average paid amount per surgeon was $34,932 (±$936,942). The largest proportion of payments were related to food and beverage (75.5%), followed by travel and lodging (14.9%), consulting fees (3.5%), nonconsulting service fees (2.1%), and royalties or licensing (1.9%), totaling 90.4% of all industry payments to neurologic surgeons. Summed across the 5-year period, the largest paid source types were royalties and licensing (64.0%; $305,517,489), consulting fees (11.8%; $56,445,950), nonconsulting service fees (7.3%; $34,629,109), current or prospective investments (6.8%, $32,307,959), and travel and lodging (4.8%, $22,982,165). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that over the most recent 5-year period (2014-2018) of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments Database, there was a decreasing trend of the total number of payments, but an increasing trend of the total amount paid to neurosurgeons.

Descriptive Analysis of Epidemiological Profile from Authors of Civil Claims Due to Supposed Medical Malpractice Against Neurosurgeons in Brazil

Introduction The neurosurgical practice often involves situations that require rapid and immediate decisionmaking, and a very lowmargin for error may eventually lead to an unsatisfactory clinical outcome. Thus, neurosurgery is considered as a medical specialty with high risk for the occurrence of litigation for supposed malpractice. The main objective of the present study was to identify the most prevalent epidemiological profile of the authors of civil claims for alleged malpractice against neurosurgeons, as well as to identify the legal strategies most commonly employed in this type of lawsuit. Methods This is a descriptive, retrospective and quantitative study, with review of the initials/exordials of all civil actions motivated by alleged malpractice against neurosurgeons, defended by an office specialized in Medical Law, from 2008 to 2018. Data were collected relative to the author of the action; the disease that led to the outbreak of the action; and some legal information of interest for the outcome of the litigation. Results During the period studied, 16 compensation/eviction claims were identified as being motivated by supposed neurosurgical malpractice. The average age of the authors was 51 years old; with a high school or undergraduate level of education in 75% of the cases, and especially from the Class B social extract (43%). Degenerative affections of the lumbar spine (12 cases, 75%) were the most common diseases that motivated the litigation, followed by brain tumors (2 cases, 12.5%), 1 case of carpal tunnel syndrome, and 1 case of chronic pain due to inflammatory radiculitis. The average value of the sponsored claim was 649,000.00 reais. Justice gratuity was granted in 80% of the cases and the reversal of the burden of proof by 30%. The main documentary evidence was medical reports ­ from third parties or the surgeon him/herself, and medical records.

Canadian neurosurgeons' views on medical assistance in dying (MAID): a cross-sectional survey of Canadian Neurosurgical Society (CNSS) members.

BACKGROUND: The Supreme Court of Canada removed the prohibition on physicians assisting in patients dying on 6 February 2015. Bill C-14, legalising medical assistance in dying (MAID) in Canada, was subsequently passed by the House of Commons and the Senate on 17 June 2016. As this remains a divisive issue for physicians, the Canadian Neurosurgical Society (CNSS) has recently published a position statement on MAID. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey to understand the views and perceptions among CNSS members regarding MAID to inform its position statement on the issue. Data was collected from May to June 2016. RESULTS: Of the 300 active membes of the CNSS who recevied the survey, 89 respondents completed the survey, 71% of whom were attending neurosurgeons and 29% were neurosurgery residents. Most respondents,74.2%, supported the right of physicians to participate in MAID with 7.8% opposing. 37% had current patients in their practice fitting the criteria for MAID. 23.6% had been asked by patients to assist with MAID, but only 11% would consider personally providing it. 84% of neurosurgeons surveyed supported the physicians' right to conscientious objection to MAID while 21% thought attending surgeons should be removed from the inquiry and decision-making process. 43.8% agreed that the requirment to refer a patient to a MAID service should be mandatory. Glioblastoma multiforme (65%), quadriplegia/quadriparesis secondary to spinal tumour/trauma (54%) and Parkinson's disease (24%) were the most common suggested potential indications for MAID among the neurosurgical population. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that most neurosurgeons in Canada are generally supportive of MAID in select patients. However, they also strongly support the physicians' right to conscientious objection.

Oversight and Ethical Regulation of Conflicts of Interest in Neurosurgery in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Developmental incentives are fundamental to surgical progress, yet financial and professional incentives inherently create conflicts of interest (COI). Understanding how to manage COI held by neurosurgeons, industry, hospitals, and journal editors, without thwarting progress and innovation is critical. OBJECTIVE: To present an overview of COI associated with innovation in neurosurgery, and review ways to manage these in an ethically sound manner. METHODS: A review of the literature was performed to assess conflicts of interest that affect neurosurgical innovation, and review ways to manage COI of various parties while adhering to ethical standards. RESULTS: COI are inherent to collaboration and innovation, and are therefore an unavoidable component of neurosurgery. The lack of a clear distinction between clinical practice and innovation, ability to use devices off-label, and unstandardized disclosure requirements create inconsistencies in the way that conflicts of interest are handled. Additionally, lack of requirements to compare innovation to the standard of care and inherent bias that affects study design and interpretation can have profound effects on the medical literature. Conflicts of interest can have both direct and downstream effects on neurosurgical practice, and it is possible to manage them while improving the quality of research and innovation. CONCLUSION: Conflicts of interest are inherent to surgical innovation, and can be handled in an ethically sound manner. Neurosurgeons, device companies, hospitals, and medical journals can take steps to proactively confront bias and ensure patient autonomy and safety. These steps can preserve public trust and ultimately improve evidence-based neurosurgical practice.

Professional Practice and Neurosurgery: What Every Neurosurgeon Should Know about Malpractice

Introduction The objective of the present study was to review the epidemiological aspects of malpractice in neurosurgery and to identify preventive measures regarding malpractice for neurosurgeons. Methods The following terms (alone or in combination) were searched in the PubMed and Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde databases: neurosurgery (neurocirurgia), lawsuits (ações judiciais), malpractice (erro médico), and litigation (litígio) and identifying studies on these topics published from 2000 to April 2018. Literature Review In Brazil, 6.9% of the physicians are sued per year. The most common type of malpractice alleged in litigation is negligence. According to the literature, the neurosurgical disease that has sparked the most litigation is spinal disease. The outcomes of these cases vary: sometimes the neurosurgeon prevails, and at other times the plaintiff prevails. To prevent or reduce malpractice claims, the neurosurgeon should take the following precautions: 1. follow medical protocols; 2. perform surgeries in an environment consistent with good medical practice; 3. evaluate and monitor antibiotic prophylaxis; 4. develop a good relationship with the patient based on ethics, good faith and transparency; 5. request the presence of the patient and of his or her family when there is a problem in order to didactically explain the case; 6. keep good medical records to document all of the actions performed (informed consent and description of the surgery and of the pre and postoperative); 7. always seek technical improvement (continuing education/professional development); 8. in the case of attending physicians, monitor patients, treating any postoperative complications; and 9. conduct multidisciplinary team meetings to optimize treatment decisions and to share responsibility for making difficult decisions.

Ethics and meningiomas: From prudence to obstinacy? The position of the neurosurgeon (for treatment or insurance purposes) in the case of complaints concerning post-operative clinical deterioration.

To treat or not to treat an asymptomatic or pauci-symptomatic benign meningioma, that is the question. And if treatment is necessary, what is the best technique: radical resection, sub-total resection or radiotherapy? This question is also pertinent for meningiomas of the skull base, posterior part of the sagittal sinus, anterior part of the foramen magnum and cerebellopontine angle. When the results of the treatment are good, the patient and the surgeon are satisfied. But when a new neurological deficit appears after the treatment, the patient is entitled to obtain compensation. What should be the position of the specialist medical assessor in this situation when the prognosis of these benign tumors is unknown? Is the preoperative information that is due to the patient complete, objective and sufficient? Is the therapeutic indication unquestionable? Is the technique irreproachable? For meningiomas, there is no "evidence-based medicine"; the therapeutic option is often based on the personal experience and/or the education of the surgeon and thus is, in fact, highly subjective.

Psychosurgery, ethics, and media: a history of Walter Freeman and the lobotomy.

At the peak of his career, Walter J. Freeman II was a celebrated physician and scientist. He served as the first chairman of the Department of Neurology at George Washington University and was a tireless advocate of surgical treatment for mental illness. His eccentric appearance, engaging personality during interviews, and theatrical demonstrations of his surgical techniques gained him substantial popularity with local and national media, and he performed more than 3000 prefrontal and transorbital lobotomies between 1930 and 1960. However, poor patient outcomes, unfavorable portrayals of the lobotomy in literature and film, and increased regulatory scrutiny contributed to the lobotomy's decline in popularity. The development of antipsychotic medications eventually relegated the lobotomy to rare circumstances, and Freeman's reputation deteriorated. Today, despite significant advancements in technique, oversight, and ethical scrutiny, neurosurgical treatment of mental illness still carries a degree of social stigma. This review presents a historical account of Walter Freeman's life and career, and the popularization of the lobotomy in the US. Additionally, the authors pay special attention to the influence of popular literature and film on the public's perception of psychosurgery. Aided by an understanding of this pivotal period in medical history, neurosurgeons are poised to confront the ethical and sociological questions facing psychosurgery as it continues to evolve.

Health transformation project and defensive medicine practice among neurosurgeons in Turkey.

BACKGROUND: The term "Defensive" medicine was coined in the early 1970's and has been an important topic of scientific investigation and professional debate ever since. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the characteristics of defensive medicine, its reasons, and the extent to which it is practiced in the Turkish health care system. This is the first national survey to study the practice of defensive medicine among neurosurgeons in Turkey. METHODS: The present cross-sectional study on defensive medicine assessed neurosurgeons registered at the Turkish Neurosurgical Society, who are actively working in various centers and hospitals within the Turkish health care system. A 40-question survey was adapted from existing measures described in the literature and was completed by a total of 404 neurosurgeons, representing 36.7% of the neurosurgeons registered at the Turkish Neurosurgical Society. RESULTS: Seventy-two percent of the participants in the current study reported practicing defensive medicine. This practice was mainly reported among inexperienced neurosurgeons (74.4%). Most were younger than 40 years of age (75.2%), working in state hospitals/universities (72.7%), and living in the Marmara region (38%). Respondents reported engaging in defensive medicine by avoiding high-risk surgery (62.6%), ordering additional imaging studies (60.9%) and laboratory tests (33.7%), and referring patients to consultants (31.2%). Most participants consider every patient as a potential threat in terms of a medical lawsuit (68.3%) and do not believe the courts can distinguish malpractice from complications (89.6%). CONCLUSION: Concerns and perceptions about medical liability lead neurosurgeons to practice defensive medicine. By avoiding high-risk surgery, ordering unnecessary diagnostic tests, and referring the patients to consultants, neurosurgeons try to minimize the risk of malpractice and protect themselves from legal risks, resulting in higher healthcare expenditure and longer treatment periods.