Preparing healthcare organisations for using artificial intelligence effectively

Ian A. Scott; Anton van der Vegt; Stephen Canaris; Paul Nolan; Keren Pointon

doi:10.1071/AH25102

RESEARCH ARTICLE (Open Access)

Previous Next Contents Vol 49(4)

Preparing healthcare organisations for using artificial intelligence effectively

Ian A. Scott ^A ^B ^* , Anton van der Vegt

^C , Stephen Canaris ^A , Paul Nolan ^D and Keren Pointon ^B

+ Author Affiliations

- Author Affiliations

^A Digital Health and Informatics, Metro South Hospital and Health Service, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, Qld, Australia. Email: stephen.canaris@health.qld.gov.au

^B Queensland Digital Health Centre (QDHeC), Centre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Qld, Australia. Email: k.pointon@uq.edu.au

^C Centre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Herston, Brisbane, Qld, Australia. Email: a.vandervegt@uq.edu.au

^D Australian Bar Association, Selborne Chambers, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Email: paulnolan@barristerchambers.com.au

^* Correspondence to: ian.scott@health.qld.gov.au

Australian Health Review 49, AH25102 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH25102

Submitted: 17 May 2025 Accepted: 2 July 2025 Published: 28 July 2025

© 2025 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing on behalf of AHHA. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Abstract

Healthcare organisations (HCOs) must prepare for large-scale implementation of artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled tools that can demonstrably achieve one or more aims of better care, improved efficiency, enhanced professional and patient experience, and greater equity. Failure to do so may disadvantage patients, staff, and the organisation itself. We outline key strategies Australian HCOs should enact in maximising successful AI implementations: (1) establish transparent and accountable governance structures tasked to ensure responsible use of AI, including shifting organisational culture towards AI; (2) invest in delivering the human talent, technical infrastructure, and organisational change management that underpin a sustainable AI ecosystem; (3) gain staff and patient trust in using AI tools by virtue of their value to real world care and minimal threats to patient safety and privacy, existence of reliable governance, provision of appropriate training and opportunity for user co-design, transparency in AI tool use and consent, and retention of user agency in responding to AI generated advice; (4) establish risk assessment and mitigation processes that delineate unacceptable, high, medium, and low risk AI tools, based on task criticality and rigour of performance evaluations, and monitor and respond to any adverse impacts on patient outcomes; and (5) determine when and how liability for patient harm associated with a specific AI tool rests with, or is shared between, staff, developers, and the deploying HCO itself. In realising the benefits of AI, HCOs must build the necessary AI infrastructure, literacy, and cultural adaptation with foresighted planning and procurement of resources.

Keywords: artificial intelligence, governance, healthcare organisation, investment, liability, preparedness, risk, trust.

References

1 Haug CJ, Drazen JM. Artificial intelligence and machine learning in clinical medicine, 2023. N Engl J Med 2023; 388(13): 1201-1208.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

2 Janssen AB, Kavisha S, Johnson A, Marinic A, Teede H, Shaw T. Implementation of artificial intelligence tools in Australian healthcare organisations: Environmental scan findings. Stud Health Technol Inform 2024; 310: 1136-1140.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

3 Apfelbacher T, Koçman SE, Prokosch HU, Christoph J. A governance framework for the implementation and operation of AI tools in a university hospital. Stud Health Technol Inform 2024; 316: 776-780.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

4 Beecy AN, Longhurst CA, Singh K, et al. The Chief Health AI Officer — An emerging role for an emerging technology. NEJM AI 2024; 1(7): AIp2400109.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

5 Hassan M, Borycki EM, Kushniruk AW. Artificial intelligence governance framework for healthcare. Healthc Manage Forum 2025; 38(2): 125-130.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

6 Scott IA, Abdel-Hafez A, Barras M, Canaris S. What is needed to mainstream artificial intelligence in health care. Aust Health Rev 2021; 45: 591-596.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

7 Loufek B, Vidal D, McClintock DS, et al. Embedding internal accountability into health care institutions for safe, effective, and ethical implementation of artificial intelligence into medical practice: A Mayo Clinic case study. Mayo Clin Proc Digit Health 2024; 2(4): 574-583.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

8 Alves M, Seringa J, Silvestre T, Magalhães T. Use of Artificial Intelligence tools in supporting decision-making in hospital management. BMC Health Serv Res 2024; 24(1): 1282.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

9 Esmaeilzadeh P. Challenges and strategies for wide-scale artificial intelligence (AI) deployment in healthcare practices: a perspective for healthcare organizations. Artif Intell Med 2024; 151: 102861.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

10 Roppelt JS, Kanbach DK, Kraus S. Artificial intelligence in healthcare institutions: a systematic literature review on influencing factors. Technol Soc 2024; 76: 102443.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

11 Callahan A, Ashley E, Datta S, et al. The Stanford Medicine data science ecosystem for clinical and translational research. JAMIA Open 2023; 6: ooad054.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

12 Corbin CK, Maclay R, Acharya A, et al. DEPLOYR: a technical framework for deploying custom real-time machine learning models into the electronic medical record. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2023; 30: 1532-1542.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

13 Stretton B, Koovor JG, Hains L, et al. How will the artificial intelligence algorithm work within the constraints of this healthcare system? Intern Med J 2024; 54(1): 190-191.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

14 Economou-Zavlanos NJ, Bessias S, Cary MP, Jr, et al. Translating ethical and quality principles for the effective, safe and fair development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence technologies in healthcare. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2024; 31(3): 705-713.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

15 Nundy S, Cooper LA, Mate KS. The Quintuple Aim for health care improvement: A new imperative to advance health equity. JAMA 2022; 327(6): 521-522.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

16 Davenport T, Bean R. Clinical AI gets the headlines, but administrative AI may be a better bet. MIT Sloan Manag Rev. 2022. Available at https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/clinical-ai-gets-the-headlines-but-administrative-ai-may-be-a-better-bet/ [accessed 10 April].

17 Hassan M, Kushniruk A, Borycki E. Barriers to and facilitators of artificial intelligence adoption in health care: scoping review. JMIR Hum Factors 2024; 11: e48633.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

18 Alami H, Lehoux P, Papoutsi C, et al. Understanding the integration of artificial intelligence in healthcare organisations and systems through the NASSS framework: a qualitative study in a leading Canadian academic centre. BMC Health Serv Res 2024; 24: 701.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

19 Gonzalez A, Crowell T, Lin SY. AI Code of Conduct—Safety, inclusivity, and sustainability. JAMA Intern Med 2025; 185(1): 12-13.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

20 Kinney M, Anastasiadou M, Naranjo-Zolotov M, Santos V. Expectation management in AI: A framework for understanding stakeholder trust and acceptance of artificial intelligence systems. Heliyon 2024; 10(7): e28562.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

21 Lahusen C, Maggetti M, Slavkovik M. Trust, trustworthiness and AI governance. Sci Rep 2024; 14(1): 20752.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

22 Isaacks DB, Borkowski AA. Implementing trustworthy AI in VA high reliability health care organizations. Fed Pract 2024; 41(2): 40-43.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

23 Kim M, Sohn H, Choi S, Kim S. Requirements for trustworthy artificial intelligence and its tool in healthcare. Healthc Inform Res 2023; 29(4): 315-322.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

24 Bergquist M, Rolandsson B, Gryska E, Laesser M, Hoefling N, Heckemann R, Schneiderman JF, Björkman-Burtscher IM. Trust and stakeholder perspectives on the implementation of AI tools in clinical radiology. Eur Radiol 2024; 34(1): 338-347.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

25 Hennrich J, Ritz E, Hofmann P, Urbach N. Capturing artificial intelligence tools’ value proposition in healthcare: a qualitative research study. BMC Health Serv Res 2024; 24(1): 420.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

26 Mahmood U, Shukla-Dave A, Chan HP, et al. Artificial intelligence in medicine: mitigating risks and maximizing benefits via quality assurance, quality control, and acceptance testing. BJR Artif Intell 2024; 1(1): ubae003.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

27 Gazquez-Garcia J, Sánchez-Bocanegra CL, Sevillano JL. AI in the health sector: Systematic review of key skills for future health professionals. JMIR Med Educ 2025; 11: e58161.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

28 Rose SL, Shapiro D. An ethically supported framework for determining patient notification and informed consent practices when using artificial intelligence in health care. Chest 2024; 166(3): 572-578.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

29 Cavalcante Siebert L, Lupetti ML, Aizenberg E, et al. Meaningful human control: actionable properties for AI system development. AI Ethics 2023; 3: 241-255.
| Google Scholar |

30 Khanijahani A, Iezadi S, Dudley S, et al. Organizational, professional, and patient characteristics associated with artificial intelligence adoption in healthcare: a systematic review. Health Policy Technol 2022; 11(1): 100602.
| Google Scholar |

31 Ranjbar A, Mork EW, Ravn J, et al. Managing risk and quality of AI in healthcare: Are hospitals ready for implementation? Risk Manag Healthc Policy 2024; 17: 877-882.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

32 Jin MF, Noseworthy PA, Yao X. Assessing artificial intelligence solution effectiveness: The role of pragmatic trials. Mayo Clin Proc Digit Health 2024; 2(4): 499-510.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

33 Dixit A, Quaglietta J, Gaulton C. Preparing for the future: how organizations can prepare boards, leaders, and risk managers for artificial intelligence. Healthc Manage Forum 2021; 34: 346-352.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

34 Ratwani RM, Bates DW, Classen DC. Patient safety and artificial intelligence in clinical care. JAMA Health Forum 2024; 5(2): e235514.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

35 Ansari S, Baur B, Singh K, Admon AJ. Challenges in the postmarket surveillance of clinical prediction models. NEJM AI 2025; 2(5): AIp2401116.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

36 Nolan P, Matulionyte R. Artificial Intelligence in medicine: Issues when determining negligence. J Law Med 2023; 30: 593-615.
| Google Scholar | PubMed |

37 Nolan P. Artificial intelligence in medicine – is too much transparency a good thing? Med Leg J 2023; 91(4): 193-197.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

38 Mello MM, Guha N. Understanding liability risk from using health care artificial intelligence tools. N Engl J Med 2024; 390(3): 271-278.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

39 McCradden MD, Stedman I. Explaining decisions without explainability? Artificial intelligence and medicolegal accountability. Future Healthc J 2024; 11: 100171.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

40 Matulionyte R, Nolan P, Magrabi F, Beheshti A. Should AI-enabled medical devices be explainable? Int J Law Inform Technol 2022; 30(2): 151-180.
| Google Scholar |

41 Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Commonwealth), Schedule 2, Australian Consumer Law, s9, s138.

42 Liu X, Glocker B, McCradden MM, et al. The medical algorithmic audit. Lancet Digit Health 2022; 4(5): e384-e397.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |