Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices Among Anesthesia and Thoracic Surgery Medical Staff Toward Ai-PCA

Figures & data

Table 1 Demographic Characteristics and KAP Scores

	N (%)	Knowledge		Attitudes		Practices
		Score	P	Score	P	Score	P
Total Score		7.8±1.75		37.43±4.16		28.38±9.27
Gender			0.042		0.018		0.228
Male	241 (46.44)	7.99±1.58		37.88±4.19		27.94±8.91
Female	278 (53.56)	7.63±1.87		37.04±4.1		28.76±9.57
Age	37.82±10.17
Institution			0.400		0.986		0.073
Non-tertiary	33 (6.36)	7.39±2.29		37.55±4.44		25.39±9.3
Tertiary	486 (93.64)	7.82±1.71		37.42±4.15		28.58±9.24
Marital Status			0.436		0.029		0.002
Unmarried and others	133 (25.63)	7.71±1.79		36.72±4.21		26.3±9.26
Married	386 (74.37)	7.82±1.74		37.67±4.12		29.1±9.18
Education Level			0.223		0.287		0.349
College and below	239 (46.05)	7.68±1.86		37.18±4.13		29.05±8.97
Master’s	229 (44.12)	7.84±1.68		37.55±4.3		27.68±9.55
Ph.D. and above	51 (9.83)	8.16±1.5		37.98±3.65		28.41±9.29
Department			0.001		0.043		0.123
Anesthesiology	497 (95.76)	7.87±1.67		37.5±4.13		28.24±9.33
Thoracic Surgery	22 (4.24)	6.23±2.62		35.73±4.69		31.5±7.33
Job Type			0.003		0.008		0.001
Doctor	439 (84.59)	7.89±1.68		37.65±4.22		27.8±9.25
Non-doctor	80 (15.41)	7.28±2.03		36.2±3.61		31.56±8.8
Work Experience	13.80±10.64
Title			0.014		0.019		0.425
Junior	184 (35.45)	7.58±1.91		36.73±4.16		27.71±9.64
Intermediate	123 (23.7)	7.85±1.65		37.63±4.09		29.09±9.58
Associate	95 (18.3)	7.73±1.72		38.31±4.41		29.13±8.25
Senior	117 (22.54)	8.14±1.57		37.59±3.9		28.09±9.15
Participation in Ai-PCA Training			<0.001		<0.001		<0.001
Yes	188 (36.22)	8.2±1.33		38.23±4.14		32.21±8.56
No	331 (63.78)	7.57±1.92		36.97±4.11		26.21±8.96

Table 2 Distribution of Knowledge

Knowledge	Correct N (%)	Incorrect N (%)	Uncertain N (%)
K1. Ai-PCA refers to a new pain relief technology system formed by the integration of the Internet of Things and artificial intelligence, achieving informatization and intelligence in pain relief. (Correct)	483 (93.06)	3 (0.58)	33 (6.36)
K2. Ai-PCA consists of intelligent infusion devices with wireless communication capabilities, disposable medication reservoirs, wireless transmission equipment, mobile ward inspection systems, and central management systems. (Correct)	474 (91.33)	2 (0.39)	43 (8.29)
K3. Compared to traditional PCA, Ai-PCA is more intelligent and efficient. (Correct)	/	/	/
K4. Ai-PCA is not significantly different from traditional PCA; they are nearly identical. (Incorrect, this question is a trap. It contradicts question 3, and respondents providing the same answers to both questions will have their responses invalidated during analysis.)	/	/	/
K5. The process of issuing orders in Ai-PCA includes assessing whether the patient meets the usage conditions, formulating a pain relief plan, issuing orders, and creating treatment records. (Correct)	459 (88.44)	8 (1.54)	52 (10.02)
K6. Ai-PCA does not design dosing plans and configure pain relief drugs on its own; it does not automate these processes. (Incorrect)	390 (75.14)	53 (10.21)	76 (14.64)
K7. Ai-PCA requires verification before implementation, and installation can proceed after the patient signs. (Correct)	482 (92.87)	13 (2.5)	24 (4.62)
K8. For Ai-PCA ward rounds, ensuring once a week is sufficient. (Incorrect)	144 (27.75)	256 (49.33)	119 (22.93)
K9. During the use of Ai-PCA, close attention should be paid to patient signs, monitoring the operation of Ai-PCA, and analyzing the patient’s pain relief needs. (Correct)	487 (93.83)	2 (0.39)	30 (5.78)
K10. Ai-PCA is very safe, and there are no pain relief-related adverse reactions. (Incorrect)	81 (15.61)	368 (70.91)	70 (13.49)
K11. In response to Ai-PCA-related adverse reactions, prompt evaluation and intervention should be carried out. (Correct)	488 (94.03)	7 (1.35)	24 (4.62)
K12. Clinical practice with Ai-PCA should follow the principles of full participation and comprehensive quality management, spanning from preoperative patient education to formal use. (Correct)	496 (95.57)	1 (0.19)	22 (4.24)

Table 3 Distribution of Attitudes

Attitude	Strongly Agree N (%)	Agree N (%)	Neutral N (%)	Disagree N (%)	Strongly Disagree N (%)
A1. You believe that personnel in the department receiving Ai-PCA training are crucial for the execution of clinical tasks and the prognosis of patients. (P)	252 (48.55)	245 (47.21)	22 (4.24)	0 (0)	0 (0)
A2. You are willing to discuss issues encountered in Ai-PCA clinical practice with other healthcare workers and attempt to find solutions. (P)	249 (47.98)	255 (49.13)	15 (2.89)	0 (0)	0 (0)
A3. You think that learning Ai-PCA expert consensus and updating relevant knowledge is not very important. (N)	84 (16.18)	100 (19.27)	28 (5.39)	217 (41.81)	90 (17.34)
A4. You acknowledge the advantages of Ai-PCA over traditional PCA in data feedback and recording. (P)	237 (45.66)	259 (49.9)	20 (3.85)	2 (0.39)	1 (0.19)
A5. You acknowledge the role of Ai-PCA in reducing adverse events related to pain relief. (P)	183 (35.26)	283 (54.53)	50 (9.63)	2 (0.39)	1 (0.19)
A6. You believe that adverse events such as drowsiness and nausea and vomiting should not receive excessive attention in Ai-PCA clinical practice. (N)	67 (12.91)	79 (15.22)	19 (3.66)	219 (42.2)	135 (26.01)
A7. You believe that Ai-PCA can significantly improve patient clinical satisfaction compared to traditional PCA. (P)	195 (37.57)	285 (54.91)	37 (7.13)	2 (0.39)	0 (0)
A8. You recognize that improving the clinical application quality of Ai-PCA requires following the principle of full participation, where all healthcare personnel are integral parts of the process. (P)	227 (43.74)	276 (53.18)	14 (2.7)	2 (0.39)	0 (0)
A9. You believe that Ai-PCA has vast application prospects and will contribute to enhancing the effectiveness of healthcare quality control and improving pain relief quality. (P)	239 (46.05)	255 (49.13)	21 (4.05)	4 (0.77)	0 (0)

Notes: P=positive, indicating a positive statement, with options from a to e assigned values from 5 to 1. N=negative, indicating a negative statement, with options from a to e assigned values from 1 to 5.

Table 4 Distribution of Practices

Practice	Always N (%)	Often N (%)	Sometimes N (%)	Occasionally N (%)	Never N (%)
P1 How often do you actively acquire Ai-PCA-related knowledge through various channels (eg, participating in training, reading literature or expert consensus, communicating with other healthcare workers)?	53 (10.21)	92 (17.73)	112 (21.58)	176 (33.91)	86 (16.57)
P2 How often do you conduct in-house education for patients (eg, avoiding patients’ misconceptions about medications, preoperative education)?	79 (15.22)	149 (28.71)	127 (24.47)	120 (23.12)	44 (8.48)
P3 How often do you adjust the frequency of patient rounds promptly based on Ai-PCA usage?。	60 (11.56)	111 (21.39)	116 (22.35)	103 (19.85)	129 (24.86)
P4 How often do you proactively inquire about patients’ pain relief needs during rounds or nursing care?	101 (19.46)	155 (29.87)	116 (22.35)	87 (16.76)	60 (11.56)
P5 How often do you promptly adjust pain relief plans and dosing frequencies based on Ai-PCA backend data analysis?	79 (15.22)	136 (26.2)	111 (21.39)	80 (15.41)	113 (21.77)
P6 How often do you monitor suspected pain relief-related adverse reactions in patients, such as drowsiness, nausea, vomiting, or low blood pressure?	157 (30.25)	182 (35.07)	85 (16.38)	58 (11.18)	37 (7.13)
P7 How often do you report the rounds of patients using Ai-PCA and conduct brief case discussions during morning meetings?	71 (13.68)	114 (21.97)	108 (20.81)	87 (16.76)	139 (26.78)
P8 How often do you inquire about pain relief satisfaction from patients?	149 (28.71)	182 (35.07)	92 (17.73)	66 (12.72)	30 (5.78)
P9 How often do you summarize Ai-PCA pain relief experiences and apply them to the next pain relief practice?	121 (23.31)	149 (28.71)	99 (19.08)	60 (11.56)	90 (17.34)

Notes: a, Always (practice frequency in the past 2 months > 6 times) b, Often (practice frequency in the past 2 months is 5–6 times) c, Sometimes (practice frequency in the past 2 months is 3–4 times) d, Occasionally (practice frequency in the past 2 months is 1–2 times) e, Never (practice frequency in the past 2 months is 0 times).

Table 5 Pearson’s Analysis

	Knowledge	Attitudes	Practices
Knowledge	–
Attitudes	0.318 (P<0.001)	–
Practices	0.011 (P=0.803)	0.185 (P<0.001)	–

Table 6 Multivariate Analyses of Practices

Practices	Univariate		Multivariate
	95% CI	P	95% CI
Knowledge Dimension	1.045 (0.944–1.158)	0.394
Attitude Dimension	1.094 (1.048–1.143)	<0.001	1.086 (1.037–1.137)	<0.001
Gender
Male	REF
Female	1.34 (0.941–1.908)	0.105
Age	1.01 (0.993–1.028)	0.246
Nature of Institution
Non-tertiary	REF
Tertiary	2.204 (0.974–4.986)	0.058
Marital Status
Unmarried and others	REF		REF
Married	1.897 (1.241–2.899)	0.003	1.526 (0.975–2.386)	0.064
Education Level
College and below	REF
Master’s	0.982 (0.678–1.422)	0.924
Ph.D. and above	1.13 (0.613–2.083)	0.695
Department
Anesthesiology	REF
Thoracic Surgery	1.51 (0.642–3.55)	0.345
Job Type
Doctor	REF		REF
Non-doctor	1.8 (1.115–2.907)	0.016	1.938 (1.16–3.238)	0.012
Years of Work Experience	1.012 (0.996–1.029)	0.147
Title
Junior	REF
Intermediate	1.517 (0.95–2.42)	0.081
Associate	1.424 (0.858–2.363)	0.172
Senior	1.351 (0.839–2.176)	0.216
Participation in Ai-PCA Training
Yes	REF		REF
No	0.303 (0.208–0.44)	<0.001	0.353 (0.24–0.519)	<0.001

Data Sharing Statement

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.