Cargando…

Workflow efficiency pilot study of Surgery Viewer(©): A secure hands-free intraoperative multimedia interface for Google Glass™

BACKGROUND: The Google Glass™ heads-up-display system has been adopted by the medical field for applications such as image capture, live streaming and decision support. METHODS: We designed a custom application for Google Glass™ called Surgery Viewer(©) to capture patient images and securely transfe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ahmad, Salman, Tann, John, Gaddy, John, McKenzie, Aaron, Zentz, Alan, Naumann, Ben, Toy, Sophia, Leighow, Carla
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6423676/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30911388
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2050312119838418
_version_ 1783404568403509248
author Ahmad, Salman
Tann, John
Gaddy, John
McKenzie, Aaron
Zentz, Alan
Naumann, Ben
Toy, Sophia
Leighow, Carla
author_facet Ahmad, Salman
Tann, John
Gaddy, John
McKenzie, Aaron
Zentz, Alan
Naumann, Ben
Toy, Sophia
Leighow, Carla
author_sort Ahmad, Salman
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Google Glass™ heads-up-display system has been adopted by the medical field for applications such as image capture, live streaming and decision support. METHODS: We designed a custom application for Google Glass™ called Surgery Viewer(©) to capture patient images and securely transfer them to the electronic medical record. Surgery Viewer(©) was compared to a standard digital camera and an Apple iOS(©) device using another image capture application. Comparative workflow metrics included timings of image capture and a usability survey. RESULTS: Ten patients were studied in operating room and wound clinic settings. Average times to log in (Surgery Viewer(©), Image Capture™) or turn on (digital camera) were 18.39 s, 9.91 s and 2.11 s for Surgery Viewer(©), Image Capture™ and digital camera, respectively. In the operating room, the average times to select the correct patient were 3.06 s, 14.77 s and 4.45 s for Surgery Viewer(©), Image Capture™ and digital camera, respectively. Average image capture times were 8.67 s, 7.77 s and 7.60 s for Surgery Viewer(©), Image Capture™ and digital camera, respectively. Images captured by Surgery Viewer(©) and Image Capture™ were instantaneously uploaded to the electronic medical record, but digital camera images took on average 1522 s to be uploaded. In the wound clinic, the average times to select the correct patient were 16.29 s, 7.35 s and 4.63 s for Surgery Viewer(©), Image Capture™ and digital camera, respectively. Image capture times were 9.55 s, 5.28 s and 3.47 s, respectively. Digital camera took on average 27,758 s to upload. CONCLUSION: Surgery Viewer(©) performed equivalently with Image Capture™ while digital camera took longer to upload. Users found the application easy to learn with Surgery Viewer(©) concerns, including log on procedure, ambient distraction from voice recognition, viewfinder perspective and battery life.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6423676
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64236762019-03-25 Workflow efficiency pilot study of Surgery Viewer(©): A secure hands-free intraoperative multimedia interface for Google Glass™ Ahmad, Salman Tann, John Gaddy, John McKenzie, Aaron Zentz, Alan Naumann, Ben Toy, Sophia Leighow, Carla SAGE Open Med Original Article BACKGROUND: The Google Glass™ heads-up-display system has been adopted by the medical field for applications such as image capture, live streaming and decision support. METHODS: We designed a custom application for Google Glass™ called Surgery Viewer(©) to capture patient images and securely transfer them to the electronic medical record. Surgery Viewer(©) was compared to a standard digital camera and an Apple iOS(©) device using another image capture application. Comparative workflow metrics included timings of image capture and a usability survey. RESULTS: Ten patients were studied in operating room and wound clinic settings. Average times to log in (Surgery Viewer(©), Image Capture™) or turn on (digital camera) were 18.39 s, 9.91 s and 2.11 s for Surgery Viewer(©), Image Capture™ and digital camera, respectively. In the operating room, the average times to select the correct patient were 3.06 s, 14.77 s and 4.45 s for Surgery Viewer(©), Image Capture™ and digital camera, respectively. Average image capture times were 8.67 s, 7.77 s and 7.60 s for Surgery Viewer(©), Image Capture™ and digital camera, respectively. Images captured by Surgery Viewer(©) and Image Capture™ were instantaneously uploaded to the electronic medical record, but digital camera images took on average 1522 s to be uploaded. In the wound clinic, the average times to select the correct patient were 16.29 s, 7.35 s and 4.63 s for Surgery Viewer(©), Image Capture™ and digital camera, respectively. Image capture times were 9.55 s, 5.28 s and 3.47 s, respectively. Digital camera took on average 27,758 s to upload. CONCLUSION: Surgery Viewer(©) performed equivalently with Image Capture™ while digital camera took longer to upload. Users found the application easy to learn with Surgery Viewer(©) concerns, including log on procedure, ambient distraction from voice recognition, viewfinder perspective and battery life. SAGE Publications 2019-03-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6423676/ /pubmed/30911388 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2050312119838418 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Article
Ahmad, Salman
Tann, John
Gaddy, John
McKenzie, Aaron
Zentz, Alan
Naumann, Ben
Toy, Sophia
Leighow, Carla
Workflow efficiency pilot study of Surgery Viewer(©): A secure hands-free intraoperative multimedia interface for Google Glass™
title Workflow efficiency pilot study of Surgery Viewer(©): A secure hands-free intraoperative multimedia interface for Google Glass™
title_full Workflow efficiency pilot study of Surgery Viewer(©): A secure hands-free intraoperative multimedia interface for Google Glass™
title_fullStr Workflow efficiency pilot study of Surgery Viewer(©): A secure hands-free intraoperative multimedia interface for Google Glass™
title_full_unstemmed Workflow efficiency pilot study of Surgery Viewer(©): A secure hands-free intraoperative multimedia interface for Google Glass™
title_short Workflow efficiency pilot study of Surgery Viewer(©): A secure hands-free intraoperative multimedia interface for Google Glass™
title_sort workflow efficiency pilot study of surgery viewer(©): a secure hands-free intraoperative multimedia interface for google glass™
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6423676/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30911388
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2050312119838418
work_keys_str_mv AT ahmadsalman workflowefficiencypilotstudyofsurgeryviewerasecurehandsfreeintraoperativemultimediainterfaceforgoogleglass
AT tannjohn workflowefficiencypilotstudyofsurgeryviewerasecurehandsfreeintraoperativemultimediainterfaceforgoogleglass
AT gaddyjohn workflowefficiencypilotstudyofsurgeryviewerasecurehandsfreeintraoperativemultimediainterfaceforgoogleglass
AT mckenzieaaron workflowefficiencypilotstudyofsurgeryviewerasecurehandsfreeintraoperativemultimediainterfaceforgoogleglass
AT zentzalan workflowefficiencypilotstudyofsurgeryviewerasecurehandsfreeintraoperativemultimediainterfaceforgoogleglass
AT naumannben workflowefficiencypilotstudyofsurgeryviewerasecurehandsfreeintraoperativemultimediainterfaceforgoogleglass
AT toysophia workflowefficiencypilotstudyofsurgeryviewerasecurehandsfreeintraoperativemultimediainterfaceforgoogleglass
AT leighowcarla workflowefficiencypilotstudyofsurgeryviewerasecurehandsfreeintraoperativemultimediainterfaceforgoogleglass