Clinician Perspectives on Automated Facial Analysis for Pain Assessment: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Physicians, Advanced Practice Providers, and Nurses
Mullins, C. S.; Espelien, C.; Gurka, M.; Chernyavskiy, P.
Show abstract
Pain assessment remains challenging in clinical practice. Automated pain assessment using artificial intelligence (AI) and facial expression analysis has emerged as a potential approach to support more objective and continuous pain monitoring, particularly for patients who are unable to communicate effectively. However, successful implementation depends on clinician acceptance. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of physicians, advanced practice providers (APPs), and nurses at a tertiary academic medical center to evaluate current pain assessment practices and perceptions of a facial-analysis-based pain assessment system. Eighty-seven eligible clinicians participated. For current assessment practices, clinicians commonly relied on observational indicators of pain, including vital signs (88.5%), physical examination findings (85.1%), and facial expressions (79.3%). Attitudes toward automated pain assessment were generally neutral to positive. Half of respondents agreed that such a system would be useful for monitoring patients over time (50.6%), and many perceived value for nonverbal patients (86.5%), patients with dementia or cognitive impairment (78.4%), and patients with language barriers (62.2%). Most clinicians reported requiring high levels of accuracy before routine use, with nearly 60% requiring at least 90% accuracy. Key concerns included alert fatigue and unequal performance across patient populations. These findings suggest clinicians view automated facial-analysis systems as potentially valuable adjuncts for pain monitoring, particularly in communication-impaired populations, while emphasizing the importance of accuracy, fairness, explainability, and workflow integration during system development and implementation.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Improving emergency department patient-doctor conversation through an artificial intelligence symptom taking tool: an action-oriented design pilot study 93%
- Multimodal Pain Recognition in Postoperative Patients: A Machine Learning Approach 93%
- A Web-based, Mobile Responsive Application to Screen Healthcare Workers for COVID Symptoms: Descriptive Study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Theory of radiologist interaction with instant messaging decision support tools: a sequential-explanatory study 91%
- Feasibility characteristics of wrist-worn fitness trackers in health status monitoring for post-COVID patients in remote and rural areas 90%
- Use of assistive technology to assess distal motor function in subjects with neuromuscular disease 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Guided relaxation-based virtual reality transiently reduces acute postoperative pain and anxiety in a pediatric population 92%
- Improving Patient Engagement in Phase 2 Clinical Trials with a Trial-specific Patient Decision Aid (tPDA): A Development and Usability Study 91%
- Assessing ChatGPT’s Mastery of Bloom’s Taxonomy using psychosomatic medicine exam questions 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Validity of the Cold Pressor Test and Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire via online self-administration 93%
- A comparison of self-triage tools to nurse driven triage in the emergency department 92%
- Identifying clinical skill gaps of healthcare workers using a digital clinical decision support algorithm during outpatient pediatric consultations in primary health centers in Rwanda 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- A typology of physician input approaches to using AI chatbots for clinical decision-making: a mixed methods study 92%
- Utilization of Generative AI-drafted Responses for Managing Patient-Provider Communication 91%
- Natural Language Processing Techniques to Detect Delirium in Hospitalized Patients from Clinical Notes: A Systematic Review 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.