However, AI models such as ChatGPT have their limitations, including deficiencies in mathematical capabilities and a restricted knowledge scope, limited to data available up to 2021. Furthermore, they carry a substantial risk of generating false information. This raises a fundamental question: where does AI acquire its learning? A 2023 Pew Research study has highlighted the concerns of many US patients regarding AI-driven robots in surgical procedures and the security of AI in managing health records. Given these current apprehensions surrounding AI, researchers have emphasised the critical need to combine AI with human expertise.
To navigate through these complexities, we have been investigating how AI is transforming the prescribing process and its impact on patient outcomes and healthcare costs. To achieve this, we recently collaborated with Medefield to conduct a survey involving 177 general practitioners (GPs) across the United States, France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Additionally, we surveyed 14 payers from Research Partnership’s global payer network in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK.
To understand the underlying reasons for these perceptions, we delved into the primary challenges that GPs believe hinder the increased use of AI. In Europe, half of the GPs mentioned “standards or regulations in the use of AI” as their main challenge, while GPs in the US identified a different obstacle, with over half of them indicating a lack of “awareness or knowledge of AI tools” as a major factor (see Figure 2).
Having examined the current usage, perceptions, and obstacles surrounding the utilisation of AI in prescription practices, we questioned our respondents about the future prospects of AI adoption in their field over the next five years. Remarkably, 62% of European GPs expressed their willingness to increase their use of AI in the prescription process, while in the US only 49% of GPs shared a similar inclination.
In alignment with current AI perceptions, European payers tend to be the most optimistic about AI’s impact on patient outcomes over the next five years. Over 70% of payers expressed a positive perception of how the use of AI to support prescription decisions will enhance the quality of care and patient outcomes. An analysis of the rationale provided by payers is presented below (see Figure 4).
Overall, payers tend to agree that AI has the potential to support health technology assessment (HTA) evaluations in the next five years (see Figure 5). Some of the reasons given for this positive perspective include faster clinical trial and real-world data analyses or providing further evidence for HTA decisions and support with routine tasks. Nevertheless, certain payers, particularly those in Germany, maintain a more negative view, primarily due to the need for human oversight, lack of current use or evidence, and concerns about bias in the AI models. A German payer commented, “The issue lies in AI models that have potentially been trained with biases.”
We gathered concluding thoughts from our surveyed payers. Some believe that collaborating on AI algorithms is more reliable than human analysis. For example, an Italian payer noted that “[AI] might be helpful, but the final decision should always be made by humans. It is important to establish laws and specific legislation regarding the proper use of AI to protect data and privacy.” Others contend that humans will always have the final say, emphasising the necessity of data protection legislation for AI use. A Spanish payer expressed the belief that “AI has great potential, offering benefits such as increased accuracy and speed, reduced costs and human errors, and improved access to healthcare in remote areas.”
There is recognition among both GPs and payers that adopting AI in prescribing can improve patient outcomes, increase patient satisfaction and, from the payer perspective, ultimately translate to cost savings. However, some point out that, for these benefits to be realised, there is work to be done in preparing healthcare systems to effectively adopt these tools. In particular, concerns relating to awareness, regulations, data protection, and bias need to be addressed to fully embrace AI. Ultimately, even if AI can realise its immense potential within healthcare, there is a consensus that human checking will still be required.
In conclusion, the rapid advancement of AI, exemplified by innovations like ChatGPT, is reshaping the landscape of healthcare and prescription practices. While AI holds great promise in improving therapeutic outcomes and potentially reducing healthcare costs, our research underscores the need for a thoughtful and measured approach.
As we navigate through the evolving relationship between AI and healthcare, it is essential to address the challenges that currently hinder its widespread adoption. These include the need for standardised regulations, increased awareness and knowledge among healthcare practitioners, and vigilant efforts to mitigate biases in AI models. Moreover, the human element remains indispensable in healthcare decision-making, with AI serving as a valuable tool, rather than a replacement.
The divergent perceptions of AI’s role and impact among healthcare professionals across different regions underline the importance of a nuanced and region-specific strategy for AI integration. European and US healthcare stakeholders have their unique perspectives and concerns, necessitating tailored approaches to maximise AI’s benefits while minimising its risks.
In this dynamic landscape, it is crucial to strike a balance between AI’s capabilities and human expertise. The collaboration between technology and healthcare professionals, along with the development of robust regulatory frameworks, will be pivotal in harnessing AI’s full potential for the betterment of patient outcomes, cost-effective healthcare, and the advancement of the healthcare industry as a whole.
In the coming years, as AI continues to evolve and healthcare systems adapt, our collective efforts to bridge the gap between AI’s promise and practical implementation will play a decisive role in shaping the future of healthcare. The path forwards may be challenging, but it is one that holds the promise of more efficient, effective, and accessible healthcare for all.
Tom Donnelly, PhD, Director
Tom Donnelly, PhD, is a director in Research Partnership’s MedTech division. Based in the US, Donnelly has over 18 years of experience in healthcare insights with a particular focus in medical technology. In addition to Chairing Intellus Worldwide’s Clear Health Communications Committee, he is a frequent industry author and presenter, and active in numerous industry groups, including the Advanced Medical Technology Association, the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, and the Digital Healthcare Collaborative. After receiving his PhD in Cognitive Psychology from New York University, Donnelly remained in education as a visiting professor at Rutgers University where he taught a variety of psychology courses for several years, before moving into the health and life sciences industry.
Contributing authors include: Constanza Salas, Jhon Galindo, and Rachel Howard.
Research Partnership, an Inizio Advisory company, is a world-leading provider of market research and insights for global life science companies. We provide custom and syndicated research that delivers fresh insights and perspectives from stakeholders across the healthcare value chain. Our passionate team holds centers of expertise, with a depth and breadth of knowledge and experience across therapeutic areas and geographies. Through custom design, robust data analysis, and consulting, we help our clients make strategic decisions across the product lifecycle, driving commercial success and positive patient outcomes.