Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
Artif Intell Gastroenterol. Nov 8, 2026; 7(3): 125126
Published online Nov 8, 2026. doi: 10.35712/aig.125126
Published online Nov 8, 2026. doi: 10.35712/aig.125126
Table 3 Nursing-sensitive performance domains for evaluating artificial intelligence integrated gastrointestinal and complex surgical care
| Performance domain | Definition | Clinical relevance | Suggested indicators |
| Workflow efficiency[14-16,47-49] | The extent to which AI supports prioritization without adding unnecessary digital burden | Surgical nurses often manage multiple unstable patients, drains, wounds, medications, mobilization targets, and discharge tasks during the same shift | Time spent retrieving risk information; duplicate documentation steps; task completion rates; staff-reported usability; time from alert visibility to review |
| Response-time optimization[44,45,47-49] | The interval between AI-generated concern and meaningful clinical action | Delays in response may worsen outcomes in sepsis, anastomotic leak, bleeding, respiratory compromise, or organ dysfunction | Time from alert to bedside reassessment; time from nursing concern to surgical review; time from review to intervention; proportion of high-priority alerts acted on within target time |
| Early complication recognition[5-9,25-30,44,45] | Earlier identification of deterioration before crisis-level presentation | Complications after colorectal, pancreatic, and hepatobiliary surgery often develop through subtle trends rather than one obvious sign | Time from first abnormal trend to escalation; proportion of complications preceded by documented nursing concern; unplanned ICU transfers; failure-to-rescue events |
| Adherence to risk-stratified pathways[10-13] | Alignment of nursing care with the patient’s predicted and evolving risk profile | High-risk patients may require intensified monitoring, earlier allied health input, or deviation from standard enhanced recovery pathways | Completion of individualized observation plans; adherence to escalation thresholds; timely nutrition, physiotherapy, wound, or stoma referral; documented pathway deviations |
| Documentation accuracy[17-22] | Completeness and consistency of clinically relevant nursing documentation following AI-supported alerts or risk classifications | AI systems and clinical teams both depend on accurate documentation of observations, actions, and reasoning | Proportion of AI-supported alerts with documented nursing reassessment and response; completeness of predefined clinical fields relevant to the identified risk; documentation of escalation and subsequent action; missing or incomplete required entries, assessed through structured record audit |
| Interdisciplinary communication[47-49] | Timely and documented transfer of clinically relevant AI-derived risk information between nurses and other professionals involved in the patient’s care | AI-derived risk information is clinically useful only if it reaches the right professionals in time | Proportion of relevant handovers containing AI-derived risk information; proportion of escalations with documented acknowledgment by the receiving team; time from nursing escalation to team acknowledgment; documentation of agreed actions or follow-up |
| Cognitive workload and alert burden[50-53] | The effect of AI tools on mental workload, interruption, and alarm fatigue | Excessive or poorly explained alerts may reduce trust and delay response to clinically important signals | Number of alerts per shift; proportion of actionable alerts; staff-rated alert usefulness; false or non-actionable alert frequency; missed alerts |
| Patient safety outcomes[44-46] | Patient-level outcomes potentially influenced by AI-supported nursing surveillance and coordination | The final aim of AI implementation is safer care, not simply more prediction | Delayed deterioration events; postoperative sepsis; unplanned ICU admission; readmission; medication errors; prolonged length of stay; patient-reported discharge preparedness |
- Citation: Kapritsou M. Nursing leadership and performance metrics in artificial intelligence integrated gastrointestinal surgical care: A narrative review. Artif Intell Gastroenterol 2026; 7(3): 125126
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2644-3236/full/v7/i3/125126.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.35712/aig.125126