Could Watson ever replace the pharmacist?

[naus]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/the-frontline-blog/2035264/ibms-watson-moves-jeopardy-pharmacy-assistant

Watson can understand human language syntax and data mine not only from preexisting databases but also unorganized data through context cues. Very different from a search engine or an automated telephone system.

Watson took on two Jeopardy champions and came out victorious, helped along by its 3,000 core processors, 15TB of data and 80 trillion instructions per second.

IBM's Mills gave the example of a pharmacist who could use the data crunching technology behind Watson to offer a better patient service, running analysis to recommend a generic cheaper medicine than the normal prescription and checking this against other medicines being taken.

"We see what we did with Watson as an obvious way to create a pharmacist assistant," Mills said. "An assistant that doesn't get tired or emotional, and doesn't walk out the door and quit."

Mills added that IBM was already embarking on healthcare projects based on Watson, but declined to comment on any costs involved. Based on the computing power behind the machine, it's fair to assume this would be a hefty outlay, so CIOs in most organisations will likely have a long wait before they get their hands on the technology.

Here's the Watson architecture:

For the Jeopardy match, the sources of information for Watson include encyclopedias, dictionaries, thesauri, newswire articles, and literary works. Watson also used databases, taxonomies, and ontologies. Specifically, DBPedia, WordNet, and Yago were used. Although Watson was not connected to the Internet during the game, it contained 200 million pages of structured and unstructured content consuming four terabytes of disk storage, including the full text of Wikipedia.

 

[DASicari]

Probably not replace. I'm not sure even Watson would know how to respond to some of the (bizarre) questions we are asked by our patients.

 

[Ackj]

Probably not replace. I'm not sure even Watson would know how to respond to some of the (bizarre) questions we are asked by our patients.

Yeah, the obscurity we deal with would be its downfall. Not to mention it would probably require proper english, and not the primal grunting and pointing that some patients use.

 

[schamj01]

Yeah, the obscurity we deal with would be its downfall. Not to mention it would probably require proper english, and not the primal grunting and pointing that some patients use.

I don't know...my computer makes all sorts of strange grunting and grinding noises...

 

[xtsukiyox]

I don't know...my computer makes all sorts of strange grunting and grinding noises...

Isn't that called porn?

 

[owlegrad]

Kinky

 

[Rockinacoustic]

Does the word 'assistant' mean nothing here?

 

[WhiteSnows]

Well, I dont think it can replace me, but it can replace you if you are not smart enough.

 

[IrishHammer]

Replace, no. Lessen the need for, maybe, but automation in pharmacy is nothing new. At the end of the day, there is still no substitute for clinical judgment. But hey, if you're that concerned that complex algorithms will render your job obsolete, then jump on board and go to school to learn how to become one of the guys creating and maintaining said algorithms.

 

[Hpower12]

I have always thought a watson or other computer could replace MDs or at least lessen the need. For instance, someone could input their symptoms, along with measuring vitals and demographic info, possible a finger prick for blood work and bam the computer could easily screen many patients that had a minor infection or cold from ones that needed more complex diagnosis.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

is that the computer that thought Toronto was an American city on Final Jeopardy?

 

[confettiflyer]

I think it'll be useful for two things within pharm:

1) Data mining large swaths of information for patterns (pharmacovigilance type stuff)
2) A more robust drug interaction/warning system (instead of just drug A vs. drug B interacting and a warning popping up).

You'll still need human sign-off...if anything for the sheer fact that you really can't sue a machine (only its operator).

...but on the other hand, an enterprising company just might say it's cheaper to have a bunch of machines vs. an army of pharmacists. Litigation-wise, you could argue that they're already on the hook for any mistakes a pharmacist in their employ would make. If you could get the laws changed, the numbers just might work.

 

[womp]

I have always thought a watson or other computer could replace MDs or at least lessen the need. For instance, someone could input their symptoms, along with measuring vitals and demographic info, possible a finger prick for blood work and bam the computer could easily screen many patients that had a minor infection or cold from ones that needed more complex diagnosis.

A large part of the medical diagnosis is not verbal and requires the whole picture. Most of the vitals that the nurses take are less than worthless. I mean how many people actually have a respiratory rate of 20 even though almost every chart I see has a 20 RR? If I went with what the nurses take down for temperature, all our patients would be hypothermic as none of them can take a temperature correctly. And the number of times I've seen blood pressure cuffs put on the elbow.... Watson would fall on its face in the real, messy world of clinical medicine.

Watson is best at human syntax parsing. Its domain is clearly in the legal field like in discovery where the English language is written in a very specific way. The pharmacy assistant thing might also work if it focuses mainly on drug interactions and giving dosing advice to the patient. The day it can replace a competent doctor is the day when pretty much every white collar job in America except AI and robot making can be replaced by a Watson like device, certainly pharmacists wouldn't still be around either.

 

[deleted129840]

If I were pushing this system, it wouldn't be to replace a pharmacist but to draw off some of the lower-end decision making. If they can diminish the work load by 10% that is already a huge savings.

 

[Ackj]

If I were pushing this system, it wouldn't be to replace a pharmacist but to draw off some of the lower-end decision making. If they can diminish the work load by 10% that is already a huge savings.

It might be able to take some of the unnecessary phone calls such as "I want to call in an rx my number is...." for patients who simply cannot just punch the numbers in at the prompt. Or maybe the calls like "is my rx ready?" could be answered after the rx goes through the verification step. Would be pretty difficult to program though, since even auto-refill phone calls are a disaster at times.