Patients are already using AI. Business sees billions, but doctors?

I’m calling my family doctor’s office to renew my prescription. The order for medicines is taken by an AI assistant. This is basically the norm, because artificial intelligence perfectly replaces humans in this case. However, the clinic’s telephone switchboard is just the beginning, because AI has already entered medicine for good.

I talk to Piotr Gajewski, president of the management board of the Polish Institute of Evidence Based Medicine, about what else patients should prepare for, whether the Polish health care system is ready for artificial intelligence and why such a large number of AI solutions are not implemented.

Beata Anna Święcicka, “Wprost”: Polish patients are already talking to AI assistants. Is the domestic healthcare system ready to implement innovations related to artificial intelligence? Are we closer to the leaders or are we catching up?

Dr. Piotr Gajewski: This is not a simple question, because the same measures would have to be used to compare the Polish system with systems in other countries. On the one hand, we learn about the global successes of Polish doctors in certain fields, e.g. pioneering telerobotic surgeries performed on patients in Warsaw by surgeons from the State Medical Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration staying in China at that time. On the other hand, in Poland we hear about restrictions in access to innovative technologies.

Because a large part of AI solutions are not implemented? Where is the biggest business barrier today: technology, regulations or lack of market readiness?

First of all, new technology should respond to a real need and not be another “gadget”, perhaps even impressive, but in reality of little use. From the idea and at every subsequent stage, close cooperation between engineers and healthcare professionals is necessary. These two environments must work together from the very beginning.

Today, what determines that a medtech project actually reaches scale and does not end with a pilot?

To a large extent, what I have already mentioned: accurate identification of the need, but also reliable documentation of usefulness (a complex and expensive process) and convincing the “market”, i.e. potential users, to use the new tool.

It should also be emphasized that an AI tool is not a static product, but requires constant verification of how it behaves and continuous development – work on it does not stop once it is introduced to the market.

Therefore, to achieve success, you need not only a good idea and competent implementers, but also sometimes huge financial outlays.

What about legislative issues?

Good regulations in this area are certainly urgently needed, but also preparation of the health “market” for the adoption of AI technology. Therefore, we need to educate the entire medical community so that they consciously approach the use of the new tools offered, with knowledge of the potential benefits and threats.

Does Poland have a chance to become an exporter of medical technologies, and not just their recipient? Will we finally have our own Silicon Valley?

We have many talented and well-educated people in Poland. However, it must be remembered that AI models intended for use in medicine are “trained” on data available to their creators, e.g. American or Chinese. Therefore, the question arises whether a tool created outside Poland, i.e. on data from a population often very different from the Polish one, can be used in our country. Conversely, will a tool created in Poland function outside Poland? I see an opportunity rather in international cooperation and the inclusion of local data, i.e. from different countries (this is what the European Health Data Space, EHDS, is intended to serve) to “train” new models for health care.

The rhetoric of Europe, tired of EU overregulation, dominates the public space. Is the EU, focusing on regulations and ethics, building a competitive advantage in AI, or is it slowing down its development compared to primarily the USA and China?

In response, I will ask: in order to equalize the chances in the race on the global market of medical AI technologies, will we be willing to sacrifice, for example, our privacy by making information about our health available for general use without effective security measures?

There is a common belief that Europe is over-regulated, but should we “let go” in the field of artificial intelligence? Regulations are needed, as long as they are good and introduced quickly – and this is already a challenge.

At this point, I cannot help but ask about the digital competences of the medical community. Will a doctor in the future be able to effectively perform his profession without knowledge and understanding of AI?

I would rather ask whether a doctor without digital competences and understanding of AI will provide his patients with the same high level of care as a doctor with these competences, assuming similar medical education. It’s more of a rhetorical question. However, it is worth paying attention to one more aspect related to AI competences, which is of fundamental importance in the doctor-patient relationship – namely trust. Which patient today, before going to the doctor, will not ask a chatbot (e.g. ChatGPT) what he or she suffers from or what treatment he should receive, entering his ailments or the already diagnosed diagnosis? Therefore, he comes to the doctor convinced that he is well prepared for the conversation and will compare the doctor’s recommendations with his knowledge from the Internet.

A doctor who is unable to explain to the patient the limitations of the information provided by AI, because he does not know them himself, will not inspire trust – which is crucial for the patient’s compliance with medical recommendations.

There is also the other side of this problem: the doctor may have the appropriate knowledge, but does not have time to explain why the patient should trust him and not the AI. And this is where AI can come to the rescue, giving time to the doctor who, using an AI tool, will not get stuck in, for example, medical documentation, but will devote more time to the patient to build the right relationship with him and gain his trust.

Thank you for the interview.

BIO

Dr. Piotr Gajewski – president of the management board of the Polish Institute of Evidence Based Medicine (PIEBM). He co-chairs the organizing committees of international scientific conferences held in Krakow: McMaster International Review Conference of Internal Medicine (annually since 2015) and Artificial Intelligence in Medicine (since 2026). An internist, doctor of medical sciences, for many years associated with the 2nd Department of Internal Diseases of the Collegium Medicum of the Jagiellonian University. Vice-President of the Society of Polish Internists and member of the American College of Physicians.