Testing an AI appointment management system
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A pragmatic trial of an Artificial intelligence DRiven appOInTment maNagEment SyStem
IRAS ID
301143
Contact name
Nicola Thomas
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
London South Bank University
ISRCTN Number
ISRCTN16329124
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier
NA, NA
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 10 months, 1 days
Research summary
Managing out-patient appointments is a challenge to healthcare providers and patients, with the possibility that missed appointments can result in missed treatments and wasted capacity. The study is evaluating a medical technology called DrDoctor which aims to improve and make best use of appointment attendance through Artificial Intelligence (AI). The technology has three main elements (1) a Did-Not-Attend (DNA) system which predicts how likely it is that patients will attend (2) a linked appointments system, which monitors the impact of appointment changes in one care pathway on other pathways, eg. blood tests with appointment changes and (3) a decision support tool which recommends the appointment type (eg. face to face vs. remote) and urgency of appointment to clinical staff, based on patient provided information.
The lead Trust (hospital) site involved in the evaluation is Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust. We are focussing on the specialities of kidney, cancer and ophthalmology (eyes). One part of our evaluation tests how effective and value-for-money the technology is. To test this, the research team will evaluate patient outcomes from hospital data at three time points: pre-COVID, three months prior to the start of the technology being implemented (pre) and six months after the technology has been implemented (post). At the second two time points (pre and post), we will collect mental and physical health outcomes and cost and service satisfaction via a questionnaire directly to patients. We will also compare pre-and post- outcomes across the sites and we will compare the outcomes across the sites with the technology, and also against the sites that do not have the technology (control). This ethics application mostly concerns the patient questionnaires described above, and will be supplemented by a Confidentiality Advisory Group (CAG) application covering the data components.
REC name
London - Fulham Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
22/LO/0130
Date of REC Opinion
1 Apr 2022
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion