Page 107 - DP-2-1

Design+ AI’s role in medical history taking

“Basically, I would say that I can certainly imagine about the impact on the doctor–patient relationship, with
that it can improve efficiency and quality, but to what fears that AI could lead to a loss of patient trust.
extent, I can hardly answer that now” (I04, 43ff) In summary, while AI technologies present promising
This uncertainty underscores the need for rigorous, advancements for medical history taking, careful
empirical research to quantify and qualify the benefits and consideration of the associated risks and challenges is
potential drawbacks of AI integration in health-care settings. essential for their successful integration into health care.
Although the initial reception of AI in medical Acknowledgments
anamnesis appears positive, there remains a significant
need for further research to address concerns, optimize None.
implementation, and ensure that the integration of AI truly
enhances patient care without compromising the essential Funding
human elements of medical practice. This research received no external funding. The study
was conducted as part of the author’s academic role at
5. Conclusion Rosenheim Technical University of Applied Sciences,
“Our intelligence is what makes us human, and AI is an without any additional financial support.
extension of this quality.” Yann and Joaquin Quiñonero. 45
Conflict of interest
In conclusion, the analysis of the interviews reveals
that doctors see significant opportunities and potential The authors declare they have no competing interests.
in AI-supported anamnesis, particularly for enhancing Author contributions
the speed and precision of medical history taking. Many
doctors highlighted the potential for automating routine Conceptualization: All authors
tasks, thereby freeing more time for direct patient care. The Formal analysis: Marina Schellhorn
availability of up-to-date medical data through AI tools was Methodology: Marina Schellhorn
seen as a key factor in improving treatment quality. The Project administration: Felix Höpfl
results indicate that doctors view AI-supported medical Resources: Felix Höpfl
history-taking as a means to increase work efficiency and Software: Marina Schellhorn
improve patient care. Supervision: Felix Höpfl
Validation: Felix Höpfl
Overall, all surveyed doctors expressed openness Visualization: All authors
to integrating AI in medical history taking, with 100% Writing – original draft: Marina Schellhorn
willing to use AI tools in their daily practice. For instance, Writing – review & editing: Felix Höpfl
all respondents could envision working with tools such
as Idana. The interviews underscored that AI-assisted Ethics approval and consent to participate
medical history-taking eases doctors’ workloads and
enhances treatment quality, with time-saving and increased All interviewees were invited to participate in this study
efficiency being the frequently mentioned advantages. The and provided their consent voluntarily. At the beginning of
integration of AI tools into daily practice was met with each interview, participants were explicitly asked whether
broad interest and curiosity, alongside a fundamental they agreed to take part in the study. Their responses were
willingness to accept technological support. recorded as part of the interview process. Participants were
informed that their participation was entirely voluntary,
The study has some limitations. Due to the small sample that they could withdraw at any time without consequences,
size, self-selection of participants, and regional limitations, and that their responses would be anonymized and used
the study is not representative of all German physicians. In solely for research purposes.
addition, the limited survey period of 2 months must be
considered a limitation. The literature used was researched Consent for publication
and selected by the authors and therefore cannot be All interviewees provided verbal consent to participate in
assumed to be exhaustive. the study, which was recorded at the beginning of each
The study also highlights several concerns. Issues interview. No personal or identifying information was
related to data protection necessitate regular reviews of the collected, ensuring participant anonymity. The study does
technology and security mechanisms. In addition, six out of not include any images or directly identifiable data of the
nine respondents identified patient constitution, particularly participants. Therefore, no additional written consent for
age, as a potential obstacle. Concerns were also expressed publication was required.

Volume 2 Issue 1 (2025) 10 doi: 10.36922/dp.7675