» Articles » PMID: 38831298

Understanding the Integration of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare Organisations and Systems Through the NASSS Framework: a Qualitative Study in a Leading Canadian Academic Centre

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Health Services
Date 2024 Jun 3
PMID 38831298
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies are expected to "revolutionise" healthcare. However, despite their promises, their integration within healthcare organisations and systems remains limited. The objective of this study is to explore and understand the systemic challenges and implications of their integration in a leading Canadian academic hospital.

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 stakeholders concerned by the integration of a large set of AI technologies within the organisation (e.g., managers, clinicians, researchers, patients, technology providers). Data were collected and analysed using the Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, Sustainability (NASSS) framework.

Results: Among enabling factors and conditions, our findings highlight: a supportive organisational culture and leadership leading to a coherent organisational innovation narrative; mutual trust and transparent communication between senior management and frontline teams; the presence of champions, translators, and boundary spanners for AI able to build bridges and trust; and the capacity to attract technical and clinical talents and expertise. Constraints and barriers include: contrasting definitions of the value of AI technologies and ways to measure such value; lack of real-life and context-based evidence; varying patients' digital and health literacy capacities; misalignments between organisational dynamics, clinical and administrative processes, infrastructures, and AI technologies; lack of funding mechanisms covering the implementation, adaptation, and expertise required; challenges arising from practice change, new expertise development, and professional identities; lack of official professional, reimbursement, and insurance guidelines; lack of pre- and post-market approval legal and governance frameworks; diversity of the business and financing models for AI technologies; and misalignments between investors' priorities and the needs and expectations of healthcare organisations and systems.

Conclusion: Thanks to the multidimensional NASSS framework, this study provides original insights and a detailed learning base for analysing AI technologies in healthcare from a thorough socio-technical perspective. Our findings highlight the importance of considering the complexity characterising healthcare organisations and systems in current efforts to introduce AI technologies within clinical routines. This study adds to the existing literature and can inform decision-making towards a judicious, responsible, and sustainable integration of these technologies in healthcare organisations and systems.

Citing Articles

A roadmap to implementing machine learning in healthcare: from concept to practice.

Yan A, Guo L, Inoue J, Arciniegas S, Vettese E, Wolochacz A Front Digit Health. 2025; 7:1462751.

PMID: 39906065 PMC: 11788154. DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2025.1462751.


To What Extent Can Digital Health Technologies Comply With the Principles of Responsible Innovation? Practice-and Policy-Oriented Research Insights Regarding an Organisational and Systemic Issue.

Alami H, Lehoux P, Shaw S, Niang M, Malas K, Fortin J Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024; 13:8061.

PMID: 39620522 PMC: 11549565. DOI: 10.34172/ijhpm.8061.

References
1.
Overcash J . Narrative research: a review of methodology and relevance to clinical practice. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2003; 48(2):179-84. DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2003.04.006. View

2.
van Leeuwen K, de Rooij M, Schalekamp S, van Ginneken B, Rutten M . How does artificial intelligence in radiology improve efficiency and health outcomes?. Pediatr Radiol. 2021; 52(11):2087-2093. PMC: 9537124. DOI: 10.1007/s00247-021-05114-8. View

3.
Wynants L, Van Calster B, Collins G, Riley R, Heinze G, Schuit E . Prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of covid-19: systematic review and critical appraisal. BMJ. 2020; 369:m1328. PMC: 7222643. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.m1328. View

4.
Alami H, Gagnon M, Wootton R, Fortin J, Zanaboni P . Exploring factors associated with the uneven utilization of telemedicine in Norway: a mixed methods study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2017; 17(1):180. PMC: 5745591. DOI: 10.1186/s12911-017-0576-4. View

5.
Greenhalgh T, Rosen R, Shaw S, Byng R, Faulkner S, Finlay T . Planning and Evaluating Remote Consultation Services: A New Conceptual Framework Incorporating Complexity and Practical Ethics. Front Digit Health. 2021; 3:726095. PMC: 8521880. DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2021.726095. View