基于生成人工智能的护理诊断和基于虚拟患者电子护理记录数据的文献推荐。

IF 2.3 Q3 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Healthcare Informatics Research Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-30 DOI:10.4258/hir.2025.31.2.156
Hongshin Ju, Minsul Park, Hyeonsil Jeong, Youngjin Lee, Hyeoneui Kim, Mihyeon Seong, Dongkyun Lee
{"title":"基于生成人工智能的护理诊断和基于虚拟患者电子护理记录数据的文献推荐。","authors":"Hongshin Ju, Minsul Park, Hyeonsil Jeong, Youngjin Lee, Hyeoneui Kim, Mihyeon Seong, Dongkyun Lee","doi":"10.4258/hir.2025.31.2.156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Nursing documentation consumes approximately 30% of nurses' professional time, making improvements in efficiency essential for patient safety and workflow optimization. This study compares traditional nursing documentation methods with a generative artificial intelligence (AI)-based system, evaluating its effectiveness in reducing documentation time and ensuring the accuracy of AI-suggested entries. Furthermore, the study aims to assess the system's impact on overall documentation efficiency and quality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty nurses with a minimum of 6 months of clinical experience participated. In the pre-assessment phase, they documented a nursing scenario using traditional electronic nursing records (ENRs). In the post-assessment phase, they used the SmartENR AI version, developed with OpenAI's ChatGPT 4.0 API and customized for domestic nursing standards; it supports NANDA, SOAPIE, Focus DAR, and narrative formats. Documentation was evaluated on a 5-point scale for accuracy, comprehensiveness, usability, ease of use, and fluency.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants averaged 64 months of clinical experience. Traditional documentation required 467.18 ± 314.77 seconds, whereas AI-assisted documentation took 182.68 ± 99.71 seconds, reducing documentation time by approximately 40%. AI-generated documentation received scores of 3.62 ± 1.29 for accuracy, 4.13 ± 1.07 for comprehensiveness, 3.50 ± 0.93 for usability, 4.80 ± 0.61 for ease of use, and 4.50 ± 0.88 for fluency.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Generative AI substantially reduces the nursing documentation workload and increases efficiency. Nevertheless, further refinement of AI models is necessary to improve accuracy and ensure seamless integration into clinical practice with minimal manual modifications. This study underscores AI's potential to improve nursing documentation efficiency and accuracy in future clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":12947,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare Informatics Research","volume":"31 2","pages":"156-165"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12086439/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Generative AI-Based Nursing Diagnosis and Documentation Recommendation Using Virtual Patient Electronic Nursing Record Data.\",\"authors\":\"Hongshin Ju, Minsul Park, Hyeonsil Jeong, Youngjin Lee, Hyeoneui Kim, Mihyeon Seong, Dongkyun Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.4258/hir.2025.31.2.156\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Nursing documentation consumes approximately 30% of nurses' professional time, making improvements in efficiency essential for patient safety and workflow optimization. This study compares traditional nursing documentation methods with a generative artificial intelligence (AI)-based system, evaluating its effectiveness in reducing documentation time and ensuring the accuracy of AI-suggested entries. Furthermore, the study aims to assess the system's impact on overall documentation efficiency and quality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty nurses with a minimum of 6 months of clinical experience participated. In the pre-assessment phase, they documented a nursing scenario using traditional electronic nursing records (ENRs). In the post-assessment phase, they used the SmartENR AI version, developed with OpenAI's ChatGPT 4.0 API and customized for domestic nursing standards; it supports NANDA, SOAPIE, Focus DAR, and narrative formats. Documentation was evaluated on a 5-point scale for accuracy, comprehensiveness, usability, ease of use, and fluency.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants averaged 64 months of clinical experience. Traditional documentation required 467.18 ± 314.77 seconds, whereas AI-assisted documentation took 182.68 ± 99.71 seconds, reducing documentation time by approximately 40%. AI-generated documentation received scores of 3.62 ± 1.29 for accuracy, 4.13 ± 1.07 for comprehensiveness, 3.50 ± 0.93 for usability, 4.80 ± 0.61 for ease of use, and 4.50 ± 0.88 for fluency.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Generative AI substantially reduces the nursing documentation workload and increases efficiency. Nevertheless, further refinement of AI models is necessary to improve accuracy and ensure seamless integration into clinical practice with minimal manual modifications. This study underscores AI's potential to improve nursing documentation efficiency and accuracy in future clinical settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12947,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Healthcare Informatics Research\",\"volume\":\"31 2\",\"pages\":\"156-165\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12086439/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Healthcare Informatics Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2025.31.2.156\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL INFORMATICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare Informatics Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2025.31.2.156","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:护理文件消耗了大约30%的护士专业时间,提高效率对患者安全和工作流程优化至关重要。本研究将传统的护理记录方法与基于生成式人工智能(AI)的系统进行比较,评估其在减少记录时间和确保人工智能建议条目准确性方面的有效性。此外,这项研究的目的是评估该系统对总的文件编制效率和质量的影响。方法:40名具有6个月以上临床经验的护士参与。在预评估阶段,他们使用传统的电子护理记录(enr)记录护理情景。在后评估阶段,他们使用了SmartENR AI版本,该版本使用OpenAI的ChatGPT 4.0 API开发,并根据国内护理标准定制;它支持NANDA、SOAPIE、Focus DAR和叙事格式。文档以5分制对准确性、全面性、可用性、易用性和流畅性进行评估。结果:参与者平均有64个月的临床经验。传统文档需要467.18±314.77秒,而人工智能辅助文档需要182.68±99.71秒,减少了大约40%的文档时间。人工智能生成文档的准确性得分为3.62±1.29,全面性得分为4.13±1.07,可用性得分为3.50±0.93,易用性得分为4.80±0.61,流畅性得分为4.50±0.88。结论:生成式人工智能大大减少了护理文件的工作量,提高了效率。然而,进一步完善人工智能模型是必要的,以提高准确性,并确保在最小的人工修改下无缝集成到临床实践中。这项研究强调了人工智能在未来临床环境中提高护理记录效率和准确性的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Generative AI-Based Nursing Diagnosis and Documentation Recommendation Using Virtual Patient Electronic Nursing Record Data.

Objectives: Nursing documentation consumes approximately 30% of nurses' professional time, making improvements in efficiency essential for patient safety and workflow optimization. This study compares traditional nursing documentation methods with a generative artificial intelligence (AI)-based system, evaluating its effectiveness in reducing documentation time and ensuring the accuracy of AI-suggested entries. Furthermore, the study aims to assess the system's impact on overall documentation efficiency and quality.

Methods: Forty nurses with a minimum of 6 months of clinical experience participated. In the pre-assessment phase, they documented a nursing scenario using traditional electronic nursing records (ENRs). In the post-assessment phase, they used the SmartENR AI version, developed with OpenAI's ChatGPT 4.0 API and customized for domestic nursing standards; it supports NANDA, SOAPIE, Focus DAR, and narrative formats. Documentation was evaluated on a 5-point scale for accuracy, comprehensiveness, usability, ease of use, and fluency.

Results: Participants averaged 64 months of clinical experience. Traditional documentation required 467.18 ± 314.77 seconds, whereas AI-assisted documentation took 182.68 ± 99.71 seconds, reducing documentation time by approximately 40%. AI-generated documentation received scores of 3.62 ± 1.29 for accuracy, 4.13 ± 1.07 for comprehensiveness, 3.50 ± 0.93 for usability, 4.80 ± 0.61 for ease of use, and 4.50 ± 0.88 for fluency.

Conclusions: Generative AI substantially reduces the nursing documentation workload and increases efficiency. Nevertheless, further refinement of AI models is necessary to improve accuracy and ensure seamless integration into clinical practice with minimal manual modifications. This study underscores AI's potential to improve nursing documentation efficiency and accuracy in future clinical settings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Healthcare Informatics Research
Healthcare Informatics Research MEDICAL INFORMATICS-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.90%
发文量
44
×
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