Exploring the potential of Chat-GPT as a supportive tool for sialendoscopy clinical decision making and patient information support.

peer reviewed[en] INTRODUCTION: Sialendoscopy has emerged in the last decades as a groundbreaking technique, offering a minimally invasive approach for exploring and managing salivary gland disorders. More recently, the advent of chatbots, powered by advanced natural processing language and artificial intelligence algorithms, has revolutionized the way healthcare professionals and patients access and analyze medical information and potentially will support soon the clinical decision-making process. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, cross-sectional study was designed to assess the level of agreement between Chat-GPT and 10 expert sialendoscopists aiming the capabilities of Chat-GPT to further improve the management of salivary gland disorders. RESULTS: The mean level of agreement was 3.4 (SD: 0.69; Min: 2, Max: 4) for Chat-GPT's answers while it was 4.1 (SD: 0.56; Min: 3, Max: 5) for the group of EESS (p < 0.015). The overall Wilcoxon signed-rank test yielded a significance level of p < 0.026 when comparing the level of agreement between Chat-GPT and EESS. The mean number of therapeutic alternatives suggested by Chat-GPT was 3.33 (SD: 1.2; Min: 2, Max: 5), while it was 2.6 (SD: 0.51; Min: 2, Max: 3) for the group of EESS; p = 0.286 (95% CI - 0.385 to 1.320). CONCLUSION: Chat-GPT represents a promising tool in the clinical decision-making process within the salivary gland clinic, particularly for patients who are candidates for sialendoscopy treatment. Additionally, it serves as a valuable source of information for patients. However, further development is necessary to enhance the reliability of these tools and ensure their safety and optimal use in the clinical setting

Correction: Exploring the potential of Chat-GPT as a supportive tool for sialendoscopy clinical decision making and patient information support (European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, (2023), 10.1007/s00405-023-08104-8)

peer reviewedIn this article, the ethics declaration statement was missing and it should have been read as “The author Jerome R. Lechien is also guest editor of the special issue on ‘ChatGPT and Artificial Intelligence in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery’. He was not involved with the peer review process of this article”. The original article was updated

Patient Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence in Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery: An International Study

Objective: To investigate the demographic determinants of patient perception toward the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery care. Methods: Outpatients consulting in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery departments of 18 hospitals were surveyed about the perception of the role of AI in health care. The results were analyzed according to the age, gender, patient use of technology, and the level of education. Results: The survey was completed by 1545 patients from Europe and the United States (participation rate: 98.7%). There were 832 (53.9%) females and 669 (43.3%) males. The level of education significantly influences the perception of AI in otolaryngological care with the lowest trust and agreement in patients with the highest education level. The study demonstrated a higher mean overall agreement score for using AI in medicine among daily users of technologies than among others (7.2 ± 1.9 vs 5.6 ± 2.6; P = .001). Females reported more frequent fears about the use of AI in otolaryngology than males. The agreement scores for using AI in medicine significantly decreased with age (P = .001). Conclusion: The perception of AI use in otolaryngology was influenced by age, gender, level of education, and the use of new technologies in daily life. Further studies promoting the use of AI in Western populations can consider demographics for improving the perception of patients toward AI, and an AI literacy component to determine whether lower trust is due to misunderstanding AI capabilities

Co-infection and ICU-acquired infection in COIVD-19 ICU patients: a secondary analysis of the UNITE-COVID data set

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic presented major challenges for critical care facilities worldwide. Infections which develop alongside or subsequent to viral pneumonitis are a challenge under sporadic and pandemic conditions; however, data have suggested that patterns of these differ between COVID-19 and other viral pneumonitides. This secondary analysis aimed to explore patterns of co-infection and intensive care unit-acquired infections (ICU-AI) and the relationship to use of corticosteroids in a large, international cohort of critically ill COVID-19 patients.Methods: This is a multicenter, international, observational study, including adult patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis admitted to ICUs at the peak of wave one of COVID-19 (February 15th to May 15th, 2020). Data collected included investigator-assessed co-infection at ICU admission, infection acquired in ICU, infection with multi-drug resistant organisms (MDRO) and antibiotic use. Frequencies were compared by Pearson's Chi-squared and continuous variables by Mann-Whitney U test. Propensity score matching for variables associated with ICU-acquired infection was undertaken using R library MatchIT using the "full" matching method.Results: Data were available from 4994 patients. Bacterial co-infection at admission was detected in 716 patients (14%), whilst 85% of patients received antibiotics at that stage. ICU-AI developed in 2715 (54%). The most common ICU-AI was bacterial pneumonia (44% of infections), whilst 9% of patients developed fungal pneumonia; 25% of infections involved MDRO. Patients developing infections in ICU had greater antimicrobial exposure than those without such infections. Incident density (ICU-AI per 1000 ICU days) was in considerable excess of reports from pre-pandemic surveillance. Corticosteroid use was heterogenous between ICUs. In univariate analysis, 58% of patients receiving corticosteroids and 43% of those not receiving steroids developed ICU-AI. Adjusting for potential confounders in the propensity-matched cohort, 71% of patients receiving corticosteroids developed ICU-AI vs 52% of those not receiving corticosteroids. Duration of corticosteroid therapy was also associated with development of ICU-AI and infection with an MDRO.Conclusions: In patients with severe COVID-19 in the first wave, co-infection at admission to ICU was relatively rare but antibiotic use was in substantial excess to that indication. ICU-AI were common and were significantly associated with use of corticosteroids

Clinical and organizational factors associated with mortality during the peak of first COVID-19 wave: the global UNITE-COVID study

Purpose: To accommodate the unprecedented number of critically ill patients with pneumonia caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) expansion of the capacity of intensive care unit (ICU) to clinical areas not previously used for critical care was necessary. We describe the global burden of COVID-19 admissions and the clinical and organizational characteristics associated with outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Methods: Multicenter, international, point prevalence study, including adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and a diagnosis of COVID-19 admitted to ICU between February 15th and May 15th, 2020. Results: 4994 patients from 280 ICUs in 46 countries were included. Included ICUs increased their total capacity from 4931 to 7630 beds, deploying personnel from other areas. Overall, 1986 (39.8%) patients were admitted to surge capacity beds. Invasive ventilation at admission was present in 2325 (46.5%) patients and was required during ICU stay in 85.8% of patients. 60-day mortality was 33.9% (IQR across units: 20%–50%) and ICU mortality 32.7%. Older age, invasive mechanical ventilation, and acute kidney injury (AKI) were associated with increased mortality. These associations were also confirmed specifically in mechanically ventilated patients. Admission to surge capacity beds was not associated with mortality, even after controlling for other factors. Conclusions: ICUs responded to the increase in COVID-19 patients by increasing bed availability and staff, admitting up to 40% of patients in surge capacity beds. Although mortality in this population was high, admission to a surge capacity bed was not associated with increased mortality. Older age, invasive mechanical ventilation, and AKI were identified as the strongest predictors of mortality

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Abstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake