Surgeon Attitudes Toward AI-Enhanced Robotic Surgery: A Survey on Autonomy, Liability, and Skill Erosion
This qualitative study explores Iranian surgeons' attitudes toward AI-enhanced robotic surgery through semi-structured interviews with 25 board-certified surgeons across diverse specialties. The research identifies four major thematic domains: perceptions of AI autonomy, legal liability and accountability, fears of skill erosion, and proposed strategies for skill maintenance. The findings highlight cautious optimism for assistive technologies alongside significant concerns regarding infrastructural limitations, lack of regulatory clarity, and potential deskilling.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
This study should be read by medical researchers, policymakers, and surgical educators seeking to understand the practical, legal, and training implications of introducing AI into surgical workflows.
What the document contains
The document covers a qualitative investigation into surgeons' attitudes regarding AI integration in robotic surgery, focusing on autonomy levels, liability concerns, and deskilling risks. It details methodological approaches involving semi-structured interviews with 25 board-certified surgeons and analyzes thematic findings relative to infrastructural and cultural contexts in Iran.
The text lacks quantitative clinical trials, technical evaluations of specific algorithms, and direct input from patients or legal experts regarding liability allocation.
- Surgeons expressed general support for assistive and shared-control AI systems while remaining skeptical of unsupervised autonomy.
- Ambiguity in legal liability and a lack of Iran-specific regulatory frameworks were highlighted as major barriers to clinical adoption.
- Participants, particularly younger surgeons, expressed concern that over-reliance on AI could lead to manual and cognitive skill erosion.
- Proposed mitigation strategies for skill maintenance included simulation-based training, hybrid curricula, and continuous professional development.
· Introduction · Methods · Results · Discussion · Limitations · Conclusion
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Accountability
3/5Clear responsibility for AI outcomes
Legal Liability and Accountability, with participants highlighting uncertainty about liability for AI-driven errors and calling for Iran-specific regulatory frameworks
Abstract
screening score · 2026-10-23
Fairness
1/5Non-discrimination and equitable treatment
Compared to international studies, Iranian surgeons demonstrated greater concern about affordability, accessibility, and the lack of legal clarity.
Abstract
screening score · 2026-10-23
Privacy
0/5Protection of personal data and private life
N/A
screening score · 2026-10-23
Enforcement
0/5Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force
N/A
screening score · 2026-10-23