Cited by 36Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility

Use and Application of Large Language Models for Patient Questions Following Total Knee Arthroplasty

Bains, Sandeep S., Dubin, Jeremy A., Hameed, Daniel, Sax, Oliver C., Douglas, Scott, Mont, Michael A., Nace, James, Delanois, Ronald E.·2024·The Journal of Arthroplasty

Abstract

Background A consumer-focused health care model not only allows unprecedented access to information, but equally warrants consideration of the appropriateness of providing accurate patient health information. Nurses play a large role in influencing patient satisfaction following total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but they come at a cost. A specific natural language artificial intelligence (AI) model, ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer), has accumulated over 100 million users within months of launching. As such, we aimed to compare: (1) orthopaedic surgeons' evaluation of the appropriateness of the answers to the most frequently asked patient questions after TKA; and (2) patients' comfort level in answering their postoperative questions by using answers provided by arthroplasty-trained nurses and ChatGPT. Methods We prospectively created 60 questions based on the most commonly asked patient questions following TKA. There were 3 fellowship-trained surgeons who assessed the answers provided by arthroplasty-trained nurses and ChatGPT-4 to each of the questions. The surgeons graded each set of responses based on clinical judgment as: (1) "appropriate," (2) "inappropriate" if the response contained inappropriate information, or (3) "unreliable," if the responses provided inconsistent content. Patients' comfort level and trust in AI were assessed using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) hosted at our local hospital. Results The surgeons graded 44 out of 60 (73.3%) r…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.arth.2024.03.017

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 36 · Cited by 36

Authors
Bains, S. S., Dubin, J. A., Hameed, D., Sax, O. C., Douglas, S., Mont, M. A., Nace, J., & Delanois, R. E.
Affiliations
Sinai Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Delanois, Ronald E.
Venue
The Journal of Arthroplasty
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-09
Volume
39
Issue
9
Pages
2289-2294
ISSN
0883-5403 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4392779412
Cited by
36
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 5
FWCI
3.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Arthroplasty (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Total Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
Keywords
total knee arthroplasty, ChatGPT, large language models, patient questions, postoperative patient education, patient trust in AI, patient comfort, consumer health information, patient satisfaction, patient-provider communication, ChatGPT-4, ChatGPT-3.5
MeSH terms
Orthopedic Surgeons, Aged, Artificial Intelligence, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Patient Satisfaction, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review