Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Complications Following Facelift and Neck Lift: Implementation and Assessment of Large Language Model and Artificial Intelligence (ChatGPT) Performance Across 16 Simulated Patient Presentations

  • Original Articles
  • Face and Neck Surgery
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 11 December 2023

This article has been updated

Abstract

Introduction

ChatGPT represents a potential resource for patient guidance and education, with the possibility for quality improvement in healthcare delivery. The present study evaluates the role of ChatGPT as an interactive patient resource, and assesses its performance in identifying, triaging, and guiding patients with concerns of postoperative complications following facelift and neck lift surgery.

Methods

Sixteen patient profiles were generated to simulate postoperative patient presentations, with complications of varying acuity and severity. ChatGPT was assessed for its accuracy in generating a differential diagnosis, soliciting a history, providing the most-likely diagnosis, the appropriate disposition, treatments/interventions to begin from home, and red-flag symptoms necessitating an urgent presentation to the emergency department.

Results

Overall accuracy in providing a complete differential diagnosis in response to simulated presentations was 85%, with an accuracy of 88% in identifying the most-likely diagnosis after history-taking. However, appropriate patient dispositions were suggested in only 56% of cases. Relevant home treatments/interventions were suggested with an 82% accuracy, and red-flag symptoms with a 73% accuracy. A detailed analysis, stratified according to latency of postoperative presentation (<48 h, 48 h–1 week, or >1 week), and according to acuity of complications, is presented herein.

Conclusions

ChatGPT overestimated the urgency of indicated patient dispositions in 44% of cases, concerning for potential unnecessary increase in healthcare resource utilization. Imperfect performance, and the tool’s tendency for overinclusion in its responses, risk increasing patient anxiety and straining physician-patient relationships. While artificial intelligence has great potential in triaging postoperative patient concerns, and improving efficiency and resource utilization, ChatGPT’s performance, in its current form, demonstrates a need for further refinement before its safe and effective implementation in facial aesthetic surgical practice.

Level of Evidence IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

References

  1. Kavian JA, Wilkey HL, Patel PA, Boyd CJ (2023) Harvesting the power of artificial intelligence for surgery: uses, implications, and ethical considerations. Am Surg. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348231175454

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hamet P, Tremblay J (2017) Artificial intelligence in medicine. Metabolism 69(Supplement):S36–S40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metabol.2017.01.011

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Mintz Y, Brodie R (2019) Introduction to artificial intelligence in medicine. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 28(2):73–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645706.2019.1575882

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Turing AM (1950) I.—Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind LIX(236):433–460. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/LIX.236.433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Rajkomar A, Dean J, Kohane I (2019) Machine learning in medicine. N Engl J Med 380(14):1347–1358

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sidey-Gibbons JA, Sidey-Gibbons CJ (2019) Machine learning in medicine: a practical introduction. BMC Med Res Methodol 19:1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kononenko I (2001) Machine learning for medical diagnosis: history, state of the art and perspective. Artif Intell Med 23(1):89–109

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Shinde PP, Shah S (2018) A review of machine learning and deep learning applications. 2018 Fourth International Conference on Computing Communication Control and Automation (ICCUBEA), Pune, India, pp 1–6

  9. Hanson CW III, Marshall BE (2001) Artificial intelligence applications in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 29(2):427–435

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhao S, Blaabjerg F, Wang H (2020) An overview of artificial intelligence applications for power electronics. IEEE Trans Power Electron 36(4):4633–4658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zawacki-Richter O, Marín VI, Bond M, Gouverneur F (2019) Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education–where are the educators? Int J Educ Technol High Educ 16(1):1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sadek AW (2007) Artificial intelligence applications in transportation. Transp Res Circular, 1–7

  13. Lund BD, Wang T (2023) Chatting about ChatGPT: how may AI and GPT impact academia and libraries? Library Hi Tech News

  14. Eggmann F, Weiger R, Zitzmann NU, Blatz MB (2023) Implications of large language models such as ChatGPT for dental medicine. J Esthetic Restor Dentistry

  15. Vaishya R, Misra A, Vaish A (2023) ChatGPT: Is this version good for healthcare and research? Diabetes Metab Syndr 17(4):102744

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nachshon A, Batzofin B, Beil M, van Heerden PV (2023) When palliative care may be the only option in the management of severe burns: a case report written with the help of ChatGPT. Cureus 15(3)

  17. Salvagno M, Taccone FS, Gerli AG (2023) Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing? Crit Care 27(1):1–5

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cheng K, He Y, Li C, Talk with ChatGPT about the outbreak of Mpox in, et al (2022) reflections and suggestions from AI dimensions. Ann Biomed Eng 2023:1–5

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gupta R, Pande P, Herzog I et al (2023) Application of ChatGPT in cosmetic plastic surgery: ally or antagonist? Aesthet Surg J 43(7):NP587–NP590. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjad042

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hassan AM, Nelson JA, Coert JH, Mehrara BJ, Selber JC (2023) Exploring the potential of artificial intelligence in surgery: insights from a conversation with ChatGPT. Ann Surg Oncol 30:3875–3878

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Gilson A, Safranek CW, Huang T et al (2023) How does CHATGPT perform on the United States Medical Licensing Examination? The implications of large language models for medical education and knowledge assessment. JMIR Med Educ 9(1):e45312

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. American Society of Plastic Surgeons (2023) What are the risks of facelift surgery? https://www.plasticsurgery.org/cosmetic-procedures/facelift/safety

  23. American Society of Plastic Surgeons (2023) What are the risks of neck lift surgery? https://www.plasticsurgery.org/cosmetic-procedures/neck-lift/safety

  24. Abi-Rafeh, J, Xu HH, Kazan R (2023) Preservation of human creativity in plastic surgery research on ChatGPT. Aesthetic Surg J (in press)

  25. Bassiri-Tehrani B, Cress PE (2023) Unleashing the power of ChatGPT: revolutionizing plastic surgery and beyond. Aesthetic Surg J (in press)

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Foad Nahai.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Human and Animal Rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

For this type of study informed consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abi-Rafeh, J., Hanna, S., Bassiri-Tehrani, B. et al. Complications Following Facelift and Neck Lift: Implementation and Assessment of Large Language Model and Artificial Intelligence (ChatGPT) Performance Across 16 Simulated Patient Presentations. Aesth Plast Surg 47, 2407–2414 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03538-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03538-1

Keywords

Navigation