Can Chatbot Artificial Intelligence Replace Infectious Diseases Physicians in the Management of Bloodstream Infections? A Prospective Cohort Study

Abstract

Abstract Background The development of chatbot artificial intelligence (AI) has raised major questions about their use in healthcare. We assessed the quality and safety of the management suggested by Chat Generative Pre-training Transformer 4 (ChatGPT-4) in real-life practice for patients with positive blood cultures. Methods Over a 4-week period in a tertiary care hospital, data from consecutive infectious diseases (ID) consultations for a first positive blood culture were prospectively provided to ChatGPT-4. Data were requested to propose a comprehensive management plan (suspected/confirmed diagnosis, workup, antibiotic therapy, source control, follow-up). We compared the management plan suggested by ChatGPT-4 with the plan suggested by ID consultants based on literature and guidelines. Comparisons were performed by 2 ID physicians not involved in patient management. Results Forty-four cases with a first episode of positive blood culture were included. ChatGPT-4 provided detailed and well-written responses in all cases. AI’s diagnoses were identical to those of the consultant in 26 (59%) cases. Suggested diagnostic workups were satisfactory (ie, no missing important diagnostic tests) in 35 (80%) cases; empirical antimicrobial therapies were adequate in 28 (64%) cases and harmful in 1 (2%). Source control plans were inadequate in 4 (9%) cases. Definitive antibiotic therapies were optimal in 16 (36%) patients and harmful in 2 (5%). Overall, management plans were considered optimal in only 1 patient, as satisfactory in 17 (39%), and as harmful in 7 (16%). Conclusions The use of ChatGPT-4 without consultant input remains hazardous when seeking expert medical advice in 2023, especially for severe IDs.