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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |