Performance of 3 Conversational Generative Artificial Intelligence Models for Computing Maximum Safe Doses of Local Anesthetics: Comparative Analysis.

IF 2
JMIR AI Pub Date : 2025-05-13 DOI:10.2196/66796
Mélanie Suppan, Pietro Elias Fubini, Alexandra Stefani, Mia Gisselbaek, Caroline Flora Samer, Georges Louis Savoldelli
{"title":"Performance of 3 Conversational Generative Artificial Intelligence Models for Computing Maximum Safe Doses of Local Anesthetics: Comparative Analysis.","authors":"Mélanie Suppan, Pietro Elias Fubini, Alexandra Stefani, Mia Gisselbaek, Caroline Flora Samer, Georges Louis Savoldelli","doi":"10.2196/66796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is showing great promise as a tool to optimize decision-making across various fields, including medicine. In anesthesiology, accurately calculating maximum safe doses of local anesthetics (LAs) is crucial to prevent complications such as local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST). Current methods for determining LA dosage are largely based on empirical guidelines and clinician experience, which can result in significant variability and dosing errors. AI models may offer a solution, by processing multiple parameters simultaneously to suggest adequate LA doses.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 3 generative AI models, ChatGPT (OpenAI), Copilot (Microsoft Corporation), and Gemini (Google LLC), in calculating maximum safe LA doses, with the goal of determining their potential use in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comparative analysis was conducted using a 51-item questionnaire designed to assess LA dose calculation across 10 simulated clinical vignettes. The responses generated by ChatGPT, Copilot, and Gemini were compared with reference doses calculated using a scientifically validated set of rules. Quantitative evaluations involved comparing AI-generated doses to these reference doses, while qualitative assessments were conducted by independent reviewers using a 5-point Likert scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 3 AI models (Gemini, ChatGPT, and Copilot) completed the questionnaire and generated responses aligned with LA dose calculation principles, but their performance in providing safe doses varied significantly. Gemini frequently avoided proposing any specific dose, instead recommending consultation with a specialist. When it did provide dose ranges, they often exceeded safe limits by 140% (SD 103%) in cases involving mixtures. ChatGPT provided unsafe doses in 90% (9/10) of cases, exceeding safe limits by 198% (SD 196%). Copilot's recommendations were unsafe in 67% (6/9) of cases, exceeding limits by 217% (SD 239%). Qualitative assessments rated Gemini as \"fair\" and both ChatGPT and Copilot as \"poor.\"</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Generative AI models like Gemini, ChatGPT, and Copilot currently lack the accuracy and reliability needed for safe LA dose calculation. Their poor performance suggests that they should not be used as decision-making tools for this purpose. Until more reliable AI-driven solutions are developed and validated, clinicians should rely on their expertise, experience, and a careful assessment of individual patient factors to guide LA dosing and ensure patient safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":73551,"journal":{"name":"JMIR AI","volume":"4 ","pages":"e66796"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12223683/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR AI","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/66796","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is showing great promise as a tool to optimize decision-making across various fields, including medicine. In anesthesiology, accurately calculating maximum safe doses of local anesthetics (LAs) is crucial to prevent complications such as local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST). Current methods for determining LA dosage are largely based on empirical guidelines and clinician experience, which can result in significant variability and dosing errors. AI models may offer a solution, by processing multiple parameters simultaneously to suggest adequate LA doses.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 3 generative AI models, ChatGPT (OpenAI), Copilot (Microsoft Corporation), and Gemini (Google LLC), in calculating maximum safe LA doses, with the goal of determining their potential use in clinical practice.

Methods: A comparative analysis was conducted using a 51-item questionnaire designed to assess LA dose calculation across 10 simulated clinical vignettes. The responses generated by ChatGPT, Copilot, and Gemini were compared with reference doses calculated using a scientifically validated set of rules. Quantitative evaluations involved comparing AI-generated doses to these reference doses, while qualitative assessments were conducted by independent reviewers using a 5-point Likert scale.

Results: All 3 AI models (Gemini, ChatGPT, and Copilot) completed the questionnaire and generated responses aligned with LA dose calculation principles, but their performance in providing safe doses varied significantly. Gemini frequently avoided proposing any specific dose, instead recommending consultation with a specialist. When it did provide dose ranges, they often exceeded safe limits by 140% (SD 103%) in cases involving mixtures. ChatGPT provided unsafe doses in 90% (9/10) of cases, exceeding safe limits by 198% (SD 196%). Copilot's recommendations were unsafe in 67% (6/9) of cases, exceeding limits by 217% (SD 239%). Qualitative assessments rated Gemini as "fair" and both ChatGPT and Copilot as "poor."

Conclusions: Generative AI models like Gemini, ChatGPT, and Copilot currently lack the accuracy and reliability needed for safe LA dose calculation. Their poor performance suggests that they should not be used as decision-making tools for this purpose. Until more reliable AI-driven solutions are developed and validated, clinicians should rely on their expertise, experience, and a careful assessment of individual patient factors to guide LA dosing and ensure patient safety.

计算局麻药最大安全剂量的3种会话生成人工智能模型的性能:比较分析。
背景:生成式人工智能(AI)作为优化包括医学在内的各个领域决策的工具显示出巨大的前景。在麻醉学中,准确计算局麻药(LAs)的最大安全剂量对于预防局麻全身毒性(LAST)等并发症至关重要。目前确定LA剂量的方法主要基于经验指南和临床医生的经验,这可能导致显著的可变性和剂量误差。人工智能模型可以提供一个解决方案,通过同时处理多个参数来建议适当的LA剂量。目的:本研究旨在评估3种生成式人工智能模型ChatGPT (OpenAI)、Copilot (Microsoft Corporation)和Gemini(谷歌LLC)在计算最大安全LA剂量方面的有效性和安全性,目的是确定它们在临床实践中的潜在应用。方法:采用51项问卷进行比较分析,旨在评估10个模拟临床小插曲的LA剂量计算。ChatGPT、Copilot和Gemini产生的反应与使用一套经过科学验证的规则计算的参考剂量进行比较。定量评估涉及将人工智能产生的剂量与这些参考剂量进行比较,而定性评估由独立审稿人使用5点李克特量表进行。结果:所有3种AI模型(Gemini、ChatGPT和Copilot)都完成了问卷调查,并生成了与LA剂量计算原则一致的答案,但它们在提供安全剂量方面的表现差异很大。双子座经常避免提出任何具体的剂量,而是建议咨询专家。当它确实提供剂量范围时,在涉及混合物的情况下,它们通常超过安全限度140% (SD 103%)。ChatGPT在90%(9/10)的病例中提供不安全剂量,超过安全限度198% (SD 196%)。副驾驶的建议在67%(6/9)的情况下是不安全的,超出限制217% (SD 239%)。定性评估将Gemini评为“一般”,ChatGPT和Copilot都评为“差”。“结论:Gemini、ChatGPT和Copilot等生成式AI模型目前缺乏安全LA剂量计算所需的准确性和可靠性。它们的糟糕表现表明,它们不应被用作实现这一目的的决策工具。在开发和验证更可靠的人工智能驱动的解决方案之前,临床医生应该依靠他们的专业知识、经验和对患者个体因素的仔细评估来指导给药并确保患者安全。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信