An interventional study of AI-Powered Physicians' Assistant in Quality of Care, Patient Satisfaction and Physician Satisfaction, sponsored by Aga Khan University. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in Pakistan. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-03.
Sponsored by Aga Khan University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other
Among 12 studies in Patient Satisfaction with a site in Pakistan — 6 open to participants now, 6 under way, none of them phase 3. Patient Satisfaction · Pakistan.
Among the 12 studies in Patient Satisfaction with a site in Pakistan, this one is the 6th largest by planned enrollment, is one of 4 that started in 2026, is one of 12 with no phase, and was the 10th registered.
877 studies on the registry are indexed under Patient Satisfaction; 202 are open to participants now.
Browse Patient Satisfaction studies →6 of the 12 studies in Patient Satisfaction with a site in Pakistan are open now. Recruiting first, the newest first:
Riphah International University · Sites in Pakistan
Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation · Sites in Pakistan
Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital & Research Centre · Sites in Pakistan
Aga Khan University · Sites in Pakistan
Khyber College of dentistry · Sites in Pakistan
A study can be open while its sites in Pakistan have not opened yet or have stopped. Only those recruiting at a site in Pakistan →
Of the 99 Patient Satisfaction studies recruiting now, 61 (62%) set no upper age limit and 30 (30%) stop at 75 or younger; 14 take children under 18; 26 take healthy volunteers.
This study: 18 Years and older · all sexes · healthy volunteers too.
The full table on the hub →This tab as a report to print or save as PDF → With an account.
12 studies; the count open now beside each. This study's row is marked.
First in 2019; this study’s year is marked. 4 started in 2026.
This study's planned enrollment of 180 is above the median of 96 across 624 interventional studies indexed under Patient Satisfaction.
Median enrollment 150 across the 12 interventional studies. Of the 4 that completed or were terminated, 0 (0%) have results posted.
This tab as a report to print or save as PDF → With an account.
None of the 12 has an industry lead sponsor. The 10 most frequent:
Aga Khan University is the lead sponsor of 294 studies on the registry; 43 are open to participants now.
Aga Khan University has 3 studies filed under Patient Satisfaction — fewer than ten, so there is no comparison to draw.
1 of the studies in Patient Satisfaction with a site in Pakistan that are under way reach primary completion within a year, 0 of them phase 3. Phase 3 first, then by date:
| Study | Primary completion |
|---|---|
| NCT07921160Riphah International UniversityHybrid mHealth and Telerehabilitation vs Conventional Physiotherapy for Subacromial Pain Syndrome | 2027-05 |
Among the 12 studies in Patient Satisfaction with a site in Pakistan, from their registry updates:
This tab as a report to print or save as PDF → With an account.
This trial aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an AI-Powered Physician Assistant in improving patients' satisfaction with the quality of care. It also aims to evaluate physicians' satisfaction with the integration of a Physician Assistant into their clinical workflows. The primary research question is
A. What is the effect of an AI-powered Physician Assistant on patients' satisfaction with their quality of care compared to the standard care?
The secondary questions are as follows:
B1. How satisfied are physicians with integrating an AI-powered physician assistant into their daily clinical workflows?
B2. Which factors are significantly associated with patient satisfaction regarding the AI-Powered Physician Assistant?
B3. Is there a statistically significant difference in mean consultation time per patient between those receiving AI-assisted care and those receiving only standard of careonly ?
Participants will be enrolled from pre-operative outpatient clinics, including patients attending clinic for anaesthetic clearance prior to surgery and consultant anaesthetists providing care.
Patients will serve as the unit of randomization and will be assigned to one of two study arms on each clinic day. On each clinic day, the first 8 eligible patients presenting for consultation will be randomly assigned to the intervention group or the control group in a 1:1 ratio. Intervention patients will proceed to a dedicated waiting room for structured digital intake via an AI platform (demographics, symptoms, history, clinical data) and receive AI-assisted care. Control group patients will undergo routine standard care protocols. The consultant physician will evaluate both arms during each clinic session, reviewing physician assistant-generated patient summaries and charts for patients in both the intervention and control groups.
Each patient will be asked to fill out the survey at the end of the consultation with the physician. The consultants will be requested to fill out a survey at the end of the day.
Patients and Patients' Proxies
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Physicians:
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
- Residents and Senior Medical Officers
The patients in this arm will receive AI-assisted care in addition to the standard care. The AI platform will take the patient's history, and then the patient will talk to the consultant as part of the routine flow.
Other: AI-Powered Physicians' Assistant
The patients in this arm will receive standard care. The standard of care for our study is what is usually applied in Anaesthesiology outpatient clinics, with consultants seeing the patients after the resident.
The study participant allocated to the intervention arm will interact with the AI-physician assistant application before they consult with the physician. The application will collect medical history of the patient. This will then be followed by an AI-generated clinical summary, which their physicians will receive before the consultation begins. Physicians will review this summary and ask further questions of patients if required. Any additions and changes in the patient's history will also be made. Physicians will subsequently conduct a physical examination of the patient. After this, the physician will be able to view AI- and guideline-based suggestions for the patient's assessment and pre-operative management. The recommendations can be selected, modified, or not used as per the physician's expertise. All additions within the application can be either typed manually or verbalised via an AI-assisted scribe within the application.
Patient Satisfaction and Outpatient Experience Score (Adapted NHS Outpatient Survey - Patient Questionnaire)
Patient satisfaction will be evaluated across two domains: (1) effective utilization of waiting time and (2) receipt of patient-centered care during the outpatient visit. Evaluated post-consultation using a structured survey adapted from the NHS Outpatient Survey: Section A (Wait Time): Wait duration (A1) and wait time utility (A2). Section B (Doctor Interaction): Patient-centered care, consultation duration, listening, and clarity (B2-B7). Section C (AI Assistant - Intervention Arm Only): Perceived listening, trust, and privacy (C1-C6). Section D (Overall Impression): Respect, dignity, and care- quality (D1-D3). Ordinal items are assigned numerical scores to calculate a composite mean score and domain sub-scores (range: 1.0-5.0). Higher scores indicate greater satisfaction.
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of the study, for each patient, for 8 weeks
Daily Physician Satisfaction and Workflow Efficiency Score (End-of-Day Physician Survey)
Physician satisfaction and workflow efficiency will be evaluated using an end-of-day survey administered to physicians whose patients were recruited into the study. Evaluated using a two-part structured questionnaire: Section 1 (Comparative Workflow): Binary comparisons across 5 domains (consultation duration, patient engagement, documentation efficiency, cognitive workload, and focus on patient care), with 3-point follow-up sub-questions for favorable intervention responses. Section 2 (Intervention Utility): 6 intervention-specific items assessing accuracy/trust, workflow efficiency, workload relief, and overall satisfaction (5-point ordinal scales; 1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree). Daily composite mean scores are calculated from Sections 1 and 2 (range: 1.0-5.0). Higher scores indicate greater satisfaction.
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of the study, for each physician, for 8 weeks
Total Physician Consultation Duration (Stopwatch Timestamps)
Evaluates total physician consultation duration (in minutes) for each patient during their outpatient clinic encounter. Consultation time refers to the active time spent by the physician while the patient is inside the consultation room. It encompasses the time taken to inquire about symptoms, conduct physical examinations, prescribe treatments, and provide counseling. Duration is objectively measured in minutes using manual stopwatch timestamps, initiated the moment the patient enters the consultation room and concluded when the patient departs. Mean total consultation times will be calculated per patient and compared between the intervention and standard care arms. Lower or more optimized consultation durations reflect enhanced workflow efficiency.
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of the study, for each patient, for 8 weeks
Process flow evaluation outcome - Mean Queuing Time (Timestamp Tracking)
Recorded using objective timestamps across two sequential intervals: Interval 1: Completion of counter registration to initiation of vital signs measurement. Interval 2: Completion of vital signs measurement to patient entry into the physician consultation room. Intervals are combined into a single aggregated total queuing time per patient visit. Lower mean queuing times indicate improved operational workflow efficiency.
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of the study, for each patient, for 8 weeks
Plan to share: Yes — The plan is to publish the study, and informed consent has been obtained from each participant. Each participant's data will be de-identified at the source level for both the application and survey.
Supporting information: Statistical analysis plan, Clinical study report
Access criteria: Through Publication Only
Data sharing details ↗ · www.aku.edu
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Start is estimated for Aug 2026; primary completion for Oct 2026, 2 months later.
Of 368 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Patient Satisfaction, half reached primary completion within 12 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 6 and three quarters within 23. This study's planned 2 months is below that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 370 studies reached it within 12 months; a quarter within 6 and three quarters within 23.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Jul 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.