This audio is generated automatically. Please let us know if you have comments.
CHICAGO – The laws of the state regulating artificial intelligence are increasing, and the leaders of the industry should intervene to help legislators to manage technology, experts said at the leadership HIMSS AI on Friday.
More than 1,000 invoices on the AI were introduced at the state level this year, including approximately 280 concerning health technology, said Tina Joros, vice-president of policy and innovation at the Soci Computer Health Veradigm.
This is compared to around 500 to 700 invoices last year, depending on how legislation is counted, she said during a round table on Friday.
“Certainly an increase of more than three to five years,” said Joros. “It’s just a flood.”
The increase occurs while federal surveillance on many aspects of health AI is relatively nascent, and the Trump administration reported that it wanted to continue a deregulative path to stimulate the development of technology in the United States
Meanwhile, the health care sector has decided to implement AI for a variety of tasks, in particular by helping clinical documentation, the results of sorting imaging or data analysis.
However, technology has risks, such as the potential for inaccuracies or bias that could cause damage to patients. Some states are interested in filling the regulatory difference – and the health care sector should weigh on how these laws are designed when working to deploy these tools, experts said.
The laws of states around the health AI have so far been thoughtful and helpful, said Daniel Smith, director of medical information for Michigan Health System Corewell Health. However, if the regulations become too wide, the use of AI to the organization could be in danger.
“So what we hoped is that what is being prepared in our legal frameworks is to take an assessment more based on risks, so that these lower risk opportunities can always prosper quickly and not be selected,” said Smith.
Where states seek to regulate health AI
This year, an important part of AI health legislation is linked to the prohibition or monitoring of the use of AI in insurers’ management processes, said Sarah Jarmin, specialist in the health program of the National Conference of States Legislatures.
Some insurers have already been exposed to the congress for having used the AI to refuse ultimate complaints or requests for authorization, when a supplier must receive approval before offering medication or service.
Last year, a report by the Senate criticized Medicare insurers Advantage Unitedhealthcare, Humana and CVS for having allegedly used predictive algorithms Waste coverage for post-sued care.
States also seek to regulate practice. For example, Arizona has adopted a law this spring which obliges payers to ask a person to verify the refusals of complaint or to reject previous authorization requests. Maryland has also adopted a law this year supervising the users’ use of technology in complaints management.
Another important area for legislation is to regulate the use of mental health chatbots, said Jaromin. For example, a law adopted in New York required that IA chatbots set up guarantees to detect signs of suicidal or self -manage.
Supporters say that AI mental health tools could provide rapid and accessible support, but other experts argue that they may not be effective enough to replace a human therapist – and could be dangerous.
AI and mental health have also received more public attention in recent months in the midst of reports on adolescents who died by suicide after developing deep relationships with chatbots.
“Sometimes that’s what you see in the news, then you will see state regulation,” said Jaromin. “And I think that’s what’s going on with payers and mental health chatbots.”
Engage with legislators
State legislators probably have no expertise in health care or AI, experts said.
In addition, many legislators who make decisions about AI policy probably have limited knowledge about what they vote, largely because no one in the community has come to tell them about the impact, said the Senator of the Bo Watson State, R-Tenn.
Health managers should meet legislators and propose the decision-makers as a resource, he said. And although it is a difficult task in politics, they should approach legislators without bias or personal interest.
“The government of the State is the infrastructure of our political system,” he said. “It is extremely important to engage in your government government and that you engage with your state legislators, because in the end, they will take 95% to 98% of the decisions that will have an impact on your business model.”
