Search

Background Artificial intelligence (AI) is a rapidly advancing field that is beginning to enter the practice of medicine. Primary care is a cornerstone of medicine and deals with challenges such as physician shortage and burnout which impact patient care. AI and its application via digital health is increasingly presented as a possible solution. However, there is a scarcity of research focusing on primary care physician (PCP) attitudes toward AI. This study examines PCP views on AI in primary care. We explore its potential impact on topics pertinent to primary care such as the doctor-patient relationship and clinical workflow. By doing so, we aim to inform primary care stakeholders to encourage successful, equitable uptake of future AI tools. Our study is the first to our knowledge to explore PCP attitudes using specific primary care AI use cases rather than discussing AI in medicine in general terms. Methods From June to August 2023, we conducted a survey among 47 primary care physicians affiliated with a large academic health system in Southern California. The survey quantified attitudes toward AI in general as well as concerning two specific AI use cases. Additionally, we conducted interviews with 15 survey respondents. Results Our findings suggest that PCPs have largely positive views of AI. However, attitudes often hinged on the context of adoption. While some concerns reported by PCPs regarding AI in primary care focused on technology (accuracy, safety, bias), many focused on people-and-process factors (workflow, equity, reimbursement, doctor-patient relationship). Conclusion Our study offers nuanced insights into PCP attitudes towards AI in primary care and highlights the need for primary care stakeholder alignment on key issues raised by PCPs. AI initiatives that fail to address both the technological and people-and-process concerns raised by PCPs may struggle to make an impact.

Implantable medical devices, such as pacemakers, have significantly improved the quality of life for patients with cardiac conditions, allowing them to maintain active lifestyles. Nonetheless, these devices can present unique challenges when interacting with the wearers physical activities, potentially leading to unforeseen complications. Here, we present a case of an 81-year-old male golfer, with a history of atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, and sick sinus syndrome, who experienced atrial lead noise from his pacemaker, exclusively triggered by his golf swing. This incident, which led to multiple interventions including lead extraction, reimplantation, and eventually a switch to a unipolar lead configuration, represents the first documented case of its kind. It underscores the intricate relationship between the biomechanical forces of certain sports and the functionality of implanted cardiac devices. Through detailed electrophysiology testing, this case demonstrates how specific movements inherent to the patients golf swing could induce micro-damage to the pacemaker leads, causing noise and malfunction. The findings from this case emphasize the need for healthcare providers to perform sport-specific biomechanical evaluations and create tailored rehabilitation strategies that consider the unique physical demands placed on patients with implanted devices. This approach is important not only for diagnosing and managing similar cases but also for advancing our understanding of how to best support the active lifestyles of patients with implanted cardiac devices, ensuring their safety and longevity.