Çelik Enes, Turgut Mehmet Ali, Aydoğan Mesut, Kılınç Metin, Toktaş İzzettin, Akelma Hakan
Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Mardin Artuklu University School of Medicine, Diyarbakır Road, Artuklu, Mardin, 47100, Turkey.
Mardin Training and Research Hospital, Anesthesia Clinic, Mardin, Turkey.
BMC Anesthesiol. 2025 Jan 3;25(1):2. doi: 10.1186/s12871-024-02882-2.
In medicine, Artificial intelligence has begun to be utilized in nearly every domain, from medical devices to the interpretation of imaging studies. There is still a need for more experience and more studies related to the comprehensive use of AI in medicine. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the ability of AI to make decisions regarding anesthesia methods and to compare the most popular AI programs from this perspective.
The study included orthopedic patients over 18 years of age scheduled for limb surgery within a 1-month period. Patients classified as ASA I-III who were evaluated in the anesthesia clinic during the preoperative period were included in the study. The anesthesia method preferred by the anesthesiologist during the operation and the patient's demographic data, comorbidities, medications, and surgical history were recorded. The obtained patient data were discussed as if presenting a patient scenario using the free versions of the ChatGPT, Copilot, and Gemini applications by a different anesthesiologist who did not perform the operation.
Over the course of 1 month, a total of 72 patients were enrolled in the study. It was observed that both the anesthesia specialists and the Gemini application chose spinal anesthesia for the same patient in 68.5% of cases. This rate was higher compared to the other AI applications. For patients taking medication, it was observed that the Gemini application presented choices that were highly compatible (85.7%) with the anesthesiologists' preferences.
AI cannot fully master the guidelines and exceptional and specific cases that arrive in the course of medical treatment. Thus, we believe that AI can serve as a valuable assistant rather than replacing doctors.
在医学领域，人工智能已开始应用于几乎每个领域，从医疗设备到影像研究解读。在医学中全面应用人工智能仍需要更多经验和更多研究。本研究的目的是评估人工智能在麻醉方法决策方面的能力，并从这一角度比较最流行的人工智能程序。
本研究纳入了计划在1个月内进行肢体手术的18岁以上骨科患者。纳入术前在麻醉门诊评估为ASA I-III级的患者。记录麻醉医生在手术期间首选的麻醉方法以及患者的人口统计学数据、合并症、用药情况和手术史。由未实施手术的另一位麻醉医生使用ChatGPT、Copilot和Gemini应用程序的免费版本，将获得的患者数据当作呈现一个患者病例来进行讨论。
在1个月的时间里，共有72名患者纳入本研究。观察到在68.5%的病例中，麻醉专家和Gemini应用程序为同一患者选择了脊髓麻醉。与其他人工智能应用程序相比，这一比例更高。对于正在服药的患者，观察到Gemini应用程序给出的选择与麻醉医生的偏好高度相符（85.7%）。
人工智能无法完全掌握医疗过程中出现的指南以及特殊和具体病例。因此，我们认为人工智能可以作为有价值的助手，而不是取代医生。
