ArticleArthroplasty today2026
Are Arthroplasty Patients Ready for Artificial Intelligence-Integrated Care?
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty patients generate high volumes of perioperative communication, yet the capacity for timely, personalized responses is constrained by growing surgical volumes. Generative artificial intelligence (AI)-powered digital medical assistants (DMAs) may help address this gap, but patient perceptions and willingness to use them remain poorly understood. This study evaluated perceptions and preferences regarding a generative AI-powered DMA among total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty patients. Methods: A prospective cross-sectional survey was administered to 101 arthroplasty patients at a single institution. The 13-item questionnaire assessed prior generative AI experience, healthcare priorities, attitudes toward DMA usefulness and trustworthiness (Likert scale), and scenario-based preferences for addressing common postoperative concerns. Composite DMA attitude scores and subgroup differences were analyzed using nonparametric methods and logistic regression. Results: Patients prioritized accuracy of health information and provider relationships over rapid assistance. Willingness to use the DMA (44.5% agree/strongly agree) and trust in its accuracy (44.5%) were mixed, while preference for DMA over human staff was low (9.1% agree/strongly agree). Receptivity was highest for supportive functions such as reminders and encouragement (54.6%). Across postoperative scenarios, calling the office was the dominant choice (56.6%-72.7%). Prior generative AI experience was the strongest predictor of more favorable DMA attitudes. Older age was associated with a lower likelihood of choosing the DMA for pain and medication concerns. Conclusions: Arthroplasty patients showed mixed but generally neutral-to-slightly positive attitudes toward a generative AI-powered DMA, with a consistent preference for human-mediated communication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.