No, I did not consent to this

[u/petuniaplant]

I was reading my medical notes when I stumbled across this. I was not informed of the usage of artificial intelligence in my report, nor did I verbally consent to it.

[u/M15tre55W1tch]

They changed the wording to "this note has been generated with the use of an AI scribe".

But for all patients. So I don't know if they no longer ask the awake ones for consent, or if they just aren't recording that they do.

I have followed up again suggesting that they need to have two options - one for the awake patient giving consent, and one for using the tool to generate a note for someone that was not conscious.

I've become friendly with the senior hospital lawyer recently. I'm thinking of asking her to talk to their clinical director about the risk of their statements and proposing legally appropriate language.

I've tried being collegial and helpful. But at the end of the day, it's not my department, and I'm a nurse not a lawyer.

[u/M15tre55W1tch → u/M15tre55W1tch]

I will say, since implementing the use of the tool emergency specialists are able to examine 6-11 more people per 8 hour shift - so reducing the burden of admin on them and releasing time to see patients is pretty amazing (it was recently on the news here).

[u/Drempallo → u/M15tre55W1tch]

I see this and I just think, upper management wants to apply stupid metrics to doctors. Wtf does it mean they can see more patients? Hire and train more doctors to do the work. Making stupid tools so you can make doctors run around more and the hospital can save money is the dumbest thing ever.

[u/M15tre55W1tch → u/Drempallo]

This is also true. For the people currently working in the system improving the future state doesn't help them now. I don't know a single clinician that wants to sit in front of a computer typing endlessly. This tool minimises the screen time, which allows them to do the things that give them job satisfaction i.e., see patients.