• errer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Sounds like the nurses who were laid off were doing a lot of “backend” stuff (talking to insurance, data entry, etc). If the AI was coming in and doing those jobs, freeing up the nurses to work more directly with patients, I could see a good argument for it. But no, they had to let the nurses go, which is just greedy and stupid as fuck given the nursing shortage.

    • TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      46 minutes ago

      Sounds more like the nurses were fired in retaliation for participating in a strike led by their union and the hospital is trying to make it seem like they did it because AI made their jobs irrelevant.

      From what I read it looked like the nurses mainly worked in patient discharge, which isn’t really a job that AI could realistically do. Half the time there isn’t really a lot of information that would be accessible, a lot of the info would be entered after discharge when the attending provider is doing their notes.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      I still wouldn’t trust AI to do that stuff. That’s how you end up killing and maiming patients.

      “You’re absolutely correct, that patient was allergic to penicillin.”

    • MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 hour ago

      As the nurses regularly have mentioned, even if they were kept on doing patient stuff, you still don’t want AI making healthcare decisions or in charge of healthcare documents.

    • Zarobi@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Yesss… we could hire more nurses with the time and money savings of A.I., but instead let’s just fire them and make more money. Doesn’t this kind of prove that the nursing shortage is manufactured? They had the option here to help improve the situation but deliberately chose profits every time

        • Zarobi@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          54 minutes ago

          I don’t get your point. There was like 8 things in my comment, which ones were not mutually exclusive?

            • Zarobi@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              21 minutes ago

              Ok, so one question equals two things being mutually exclusive? This has to be the laziest attempt to start an argument I’ve seen on Lemmy so far

  • Emi@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 hours ago

    How tf do you replace nurses with ai? How does a chatbot put in a infusion needle?

    • Elextra@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Its not those types of nurses. Its utilization review nurses and honestly every nurse in this related field knew this was likely to happen and aren’t in disagreement with it. Bedside nurses (which hold greater power than other nursing in unions) have no idea what some other fields of nursing do.

      Its actually good use of “AI”

      How this position works is that you had nurses manually scanning and scouring different parts of the chart, manually typing down some of those findings, clicking check boxes anyways for medical necessity. Honestly, it was annoying and very administrative in nature. It took 20-25 minutes on average to do a review 10 years ago with most of it just reviewing the chart to put in your notes and check off boxes.

      Technology has improved with navigators to more easily find the information so it quickened the time over the years to find the information. But I also knew this position was going to be the first place most places were going to implement AI. Why? Its honestly just pulling information. So whats going to end up happening in this field is that you’re going to need less nurses to do the same volume. Its honestly better use of this sort of nurse. Have them manage more cases and audit the information being pulled by whatever AI tech is being used (If it’s Interqual Autoreview, this technology dates back to 2018 and is tested). Because thats all they are doing anyways. It’s a medical audit. They do help more patients this way but the union won’t tell you that and disappointed that the Guardian didn’t explain the finer details.

      I’ve been telling people this is going to happen for years and most people in this specific nursing field are not opposed to it because they all use it anyways already (at least in CA). You’re either using Milliman or Interqual for the job. There are no other software to use lol

      Sorry this is long. Just frustrating article to read.

      • MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I don’t know a lot of nurses, but those I have heard from suggest that AI in the medical field will lead to worse healthcare outcomes.

        In the article they say “Shuler said her job often requires complicated communications, over things like medication changes and discharge planning, that would be hard to conduct with AI.”

        I don’t want AI in charge of medication changes. That doesn’t seem like a checkbox kind of thing. I can see how maybe it could be boiled down to a checkbox or flowchart, but it doesn’t seem like it’s just data entry. Which I still don’t know that I want AI solely responsible for.

      • GalacticRobot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Yeah, basically for every hour a doc spends with a patient, they spend 2 hours with the electronic medical record, even with scribes. A whole lot of effort is going to modernizing and automating this, as it will free up a whole lot of doctor and nurse time, which is sorely needed.

      • GalacticRobot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        If you read the article is was nurses that were essentially doing administrative work and not actual patient functions. The stuff that AI absolutely should be replacing. It seems though that at least from the story, the nurses weren’t able or weren’t needed at that hospital for patient care.

  • Thatuserguy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    If a clanker ever appears in my hospital stay in any capacity, I will subverting its directive so it explicitly states that the hospital stay is free of charge

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Of course, all this will just lead to more malpractice lawsuits, and now only the hospitals are liable.

  • creamfresh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    That’s not what they meant when they said that AIs can be a powerful tool for doctors.

    • GalacticRobot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      It’s exactly what they meant. Replacing people coding things into electronic medical records, automating transcription, and reducing administrative burden is exactly what AI should do. This frees up time for caregivers to actually care and see more patients rather than sitting in front a computer all day.