Endoscopist sentiments on artificial intelligence in endoscopy: A Large-scale intercontinental opinion survey

Endoscopy, vol. 56, pp. S353

Abstract

Aims In recent years, there has been rapid development of AI devices in endoscopy. Little is however known about endoscopist perception regarding AI in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to undertake an international endoscopist opinion survey on behalf of the World Endoscopy Organization AI committee about the use of artificial intelligence. Methods A prospective questionnaire study was conducted as part of the World Endoscopy Organization AI committee activities. The committee developed 23 statements on the use of AI in endoscopy which were distributed to endoscopists using an online survey platform. Endoscopists responded to each of the statements by using a 5-point Likert-scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). Results In total, 465 endoscopists completed the survey (from 83 countries). The endoscopists background was general (36%), specialist interventional (55%) and trainee (9%). 39% had experience of using AI in clinical practice. The majority believed that AI would improve endoscopy quality (90%), efficiency (87%) and patient outcomes (86%). Most thought that CADe would help detect clinically relevant polyps (86%) and upper GI neoplasia (87%). 68% felt more comfortable leaving in a diminutive rectosigmoid polyp with CADx assistance. Financial re-imbursement was considered important (72%) and most were concerned about medical liability (47%), with a mixed view on accountability (endoscopist 57%, manufacturer 22% and hospital 8%). Potential de-skilling was a concern (37%). A small majority felt that AI would lead to unnecessary resections and biopsies in the upper and lower GI tract, and also lengthen procedure times. Overall, the majority would use upper GI CADe (90%), lower GI CADe (83%) and CADx (87%) when available. Conclusions In this international endoscopist survey, participants strongly believed that AI would improve endoscopy quality and outcomes. Financial re-imbursement, concerns about medical liability and potential de-skilling are important issues. A small majority felt that AI would lead to unnecessary resections and increase procedure times. Overall, the vast majority would use AI when available. Publication History Article published online: 15 April 2024 © 2024. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

Authors 14

1. Jeroen de Groof

   Amsterdam University Medical Centers · Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

   Affiliation as printed

   Amsterdam UMC, locatie VUmc, Amsterdam, Netherlands

2. Omer F. Ahmad

   University College London

   Affiliation as printed

   Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London (UCL), London, United Kingdom

3. Megan M.L. Engels Aachen

   Leiden University Medical Center

   Affiliation as printed

   Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, Netherlands

4. Sanne A.M. Hoogenboom

   Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

   Affiliation as printed

   VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands

5. Nayantara Coelho–Prabhu

   Mayo Clinic

   Affiliation as printed

   Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States of America

6. Honggang Yu

   Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University

   Affiliation as printed

   Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China

7. Michael Mwachiro

   Tenwek Hospital

   Affiliation as printed

   Tenwek Hospital, Bomet, Kenya

8. Sravanthi Parasa

   Swedish Medical Center

   Affiliation as printed

   Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, United States of America

9. Junaid Mushtaq

   Lahore General Hospital

   Affiliation as printed

   General Hospital Lahore, Lahore, Pakistan

10. Helmut Neumann

    University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz

    Affiliation as printed

    University Medical Center Mainz, Interventional Endoscopy Center, Mainz, Germany

11. Shyam J Thakkar

    West Virginia University

    Affiliation as printed

    West Virginia University, Morgantown, United States of America

12. Michael F. Byrne

    Vancouver General Hospital

    Affiliation as printed

    Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, Canada

13. Jeanin Elise van Hooft

    Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

    Affiliation as printed

    VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands

14. Tomonori Yano

    Jichi Medical University

    Affiliation as printed

    Jichi Medical University, Shimotsuke, Japan