Artificial Intelligence Latency, Report Turnaround Time, and Adoption in a Multivendor Artificial Intelligence Ecosystem: A Multisite Observational Study.

Sergey Morozov, Natalie Heracleous, Octave Novarina, Diana Korka, Benoît Dufour, Cyril Thouly, Benoît Rizk
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence Latency, Report Turnaround Time, and Adoption in a Multivendor Artificial Intelligence Ecosystem: A Multisite Observational Study.","authors":"Sergey Morozov, Natalie Heracleous, Octave Novarina, Diana Korka, Benoît Dufour, Cyril Thouly, Benoît Rizk","doi":"10.1016/j.jacr.2026.09.026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate infrastructure latency, workflow, and radiologist sentiment across a 4.5-year, multivendor artificial intelligence (AI) implementation program in a 20-center outpatient radiology network.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three retrospective cohorts: a technical cohort (96,874 examinations; Sep 2023-Sep 2025) for PACS-to-PACS latency of 9 AI tools and temporal alignment of 10 AI tools; a report turnaround time (TAT) analysis cohort (20,909 examinations; March to August 2025) comparing TAT between AI-available and concurrent non-AI workflows by Mann-Whitney U; and a survey cohort (58 radiologists; two waves 2025) for adoption, Likert-scale perceptions, and Net Promoter Score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Active AI adoption was 91.4% (53 of 58), with 66% (35 of 53) reporting regular use. Median total latency was 2.06 min (IQR 1.74-3.05), 72% of which attributable to data routing. The \"Too Late\" rate (AI result arriving after report finalization) was 7.2% overall, ranging from 3.0% for knee MRI to 13.2% for chest CT. After adjustment for radiologist (linear mixed-effects models), AI availability was associated with lower median TAT for trauma radiography (-26%) and knee MRI (-18%; both P < .001); brain volumetry MRI showed no significant change (+9.2%; P = .33). In exploratory analysis, Net Promoter Score declined for chest CT (+38 to -3) and aorta CT (+22 to -25), nominally significant before multiple-comparison correction.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Multivendor AI at scale was associated with measurable TAT gains in high-volume modalities. Infrastructure latency, not algorithm speed, was the primary barrier to clinical utility. At ∼23% to 25% annualized cost of one radiologist full-time equivalent (FTE) salary, the program generated 0.69 FTE of capacity through trauma radiography alone (0.46 FTE after radiologist-adjusted sensitivity analysis).</p>","PeriodicalId":73968,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2026.09.026","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

Objective: To evaluate infrastructure latency, workflow, and radiologist sentiment across a 4.5-year, multivendor artificial intelligence (AI) implementation program in a 20-center outpatient radiology network.

Methods: Three retrospective cohorts: a technical cohort (96,874 examinations; Sep 2023-Sep 2025) for PACS-to-PACS latency of 9 AI tools and temporal alignment of 10 AI tools; a report turnaround time (TAT) analysis cohort (20,909 examinations; March to August 2025) comparing TAT between AI-available and concurrent non-AI workflows by Mann-Whitney U; and a survey cohort (58 radiologists; two waves 2025) for adoption, Likert-scale perceptions, and Net Promoter Score.

Results: Active AI adoption was 91.4% (53 of 58), with 66% (35 of 53) reporting regular use. Median total latency was 2.06 min (IQR 1.74-3.05), 72% of which attributable to data routing. The "Too Late" rate (AI result arriving after report finalization) was 7.2% overall, ranging from 3.0% for knee MRI to 13.2% for chest CT. After adjustment for radiologist (linear mixed-effects models), AI availability was associated with lower median TAT for trauma radiography (-26%) and knee MRI (-18%; both P < .001); brain volumetry MRI showed no significant change (+9.2%; P = .33). In exploratory analysis, Net Promoter Score declined for chest CT (+38 to -3) and aorta CT (+22 to -25), nominally significant before multiple-comparison correction.

Discussion: Multivendor AI at scale was associated with measurable TAT gains in high-volume modalities. Infrastructure latency, not algorithm speed, was the primary barrier to clinical utility. At ∼23% to 25% annualized cost of one radiologist full-time equivalent (FTE) salary, the program generated 0.69 FTE of capacity through trauma radiography alone (0.46 FTE after radiologist-adjusted sensitivity analysis).

多供应商AI生态系统中的AI延迟、报告周转时间和采用:一项多站点观察研究。
目的:在一个20个中心的门诊放射网络中,通过一个4.5年的多供应商人工智能实施计划,评估基础设施延迟、工作流程和放射科医生的情绪。方法:三个回顾性队列:技术队列(96,874例检查,2023年9月至2025年9月),用于7家供应商的10种人工智能工具的PACS-to-PACS延迟和时间对齐;报告周转时间(TAT)分析队列(20,909次考试,2025年3月至8月)比较人工智能可用和并发非人工智能工作流之间的TAT;以及一项调查队列(58名放射科医生;2025年两波)的采用、李克特量表感知和净推荐值(NPS)。结果:主动人工智能采用率为91.4%(53/58),66%(35/53)报告经常使用人工智能。总延迟中位数为2.06分钟[四分位间距为1.74-3.05],其中72%归因于数据路由。总体而言,“为时已晚”的比率(AI结果在报告完成后到达)为7.2%,从膝关节MRI的3.0%到胸部CT的13.2%不等。在对放射科医生(线性混合效应模型)进行调整后,人工智能的可用性与创伤放射照相(-26%)和膝关节MRI(-18%)的中位TAT较低相关;两者都与大容量模式下多供应商人工智能与可测量的TAT增益相关。基础设施延迟,而不是算法速度,是临床应用的主要障碍。在一名放射科医生全职等值(FTE)工资的年化成本为23-25%的情况下,该项目仅通过创伤放射学就产生了0.69 FTE的能力(经放射科医生调整敏感性分析后为0.46 FTE)。
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
小红书