RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This article explores the transformative impact of OpenAI and ChatGPT on Australian medical practitioners, particularly psychiatrists in the private practice setting. It delves into the extensive benefits and limitations associated with integrating ChatGPT into medical practice, summarising current policies and scrutinising medicolegal implications. CONCLUSION: A careful assessment is imperative to determine whether the benefits of AI integration outweigh the associated risks. Practitioners are urged to review AI-generated content to ensure its accuracy, recognising that liability likely resides with them rather than with AI platforms, despite the lack of case law specific to negligence and AI in the Australian context at present. It is important to employ measures that ensure patient confidentiality is not breached and practitioners are encouraged to seek counsel from their professional indemnity insurer. There is considerable potential for future development of specialised AI software tailored specifically for the medical profession, making the use of AI more suitable for the medical field in the Australian legal landscape. Moving forward, it is essential to embrace technology and actively address its challenges rather than dismissing AI integration into medical practice. It is becoming increasingly essential that both the psychiatric community, medical community at large and policy makers develop comprehensive guidelines to fill existing policy gaps and adapt to the evolving landscape of AI technologies in healthcare.
Asunto(s)
Práctica Privada , Psiquiatría , Humanos , Australia , Psiquiatría/legislación & jurisprudencia , Psiquiatría/normas , Práctica Privada/legislación & jurisprudencia , Práctica Privada/organización & administración , Inteligencia Artificial/legislación & jurisprudencia , Confidencialidad/legislación & jurisprudencia , Confidencialidad/normasRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article is to present a decision aid in the form of a flowchart, designed to assist psychiatrists in navigating the challenges of off-label medication use. This tool is believed to be the only one currently available that combines guidance from medical indemnity insurers, RANZCP guidelines, CATG frameworks, and relevant legislation to provide a practical guide for everyday psychiatric practice. CONCLUSIONS: There are clinical, legal, ethical, and financial considerations to take into account each time an off-label prescription is ordered. There is no legal barrier to prevent psychiatrists from prescribing off-label in Australia and New Zealand. The medication should be utilised if it is in the best interests of the patient. However, practitioners must be able to defend the rationale for their off-label medication use with evidence of sound quality. Off-label use medication use can lead to improved patient outcomes and quality of life. On the other hand, poor practice in off-label prescribing can result in adverse events, patient harm, legal implications, and damage to professional reputation. By evaluating available evidence, considering patient characteristics, obtaining informed consent, and documenting the rationale for off-label use, clinical decision-making can be enhanced whilst mitigating the risks associated with off-label prescribing.
Asunto(s)
Uso Fuera de lo Indicado , Psiquiatría , Humanos , Calidad de Vida , Consentimiento Informado , AustraliaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Terminating a therapeutic relationship can be particularly challenging and onerous for the treating medical practitioner. There are multiple reasons why a practitioner may desire to terminate the relationship, ranging from inappropriate behaviour and assault through to threatened or actual litigation. This paper provides psychiatrists as well as all doctors and support staff who work alongside them with a simple, step-by-step visual guide to terminating a therapeutic relationship, giving due consideration to their professional and legal obligations in line with common recommendations by medical indemnity organisations. CONCLUSIONS: If a practitioner's ability to manage the patient is inadequate or compromised due to an emotional, financial, or legal circumstance, it is reasonable to consider termination of the relationship. Practical steps such as taking contemporaneous notes, writing to the patient and their primary care doctor, ensuring continuity of healthcare, and communicating with authorities where appropriate have been identified as components commonly recommended by medical indemnity insurance organisations.