Literature DB >> 16754183

Voice recognition interfaces (VRI) optimize the utilization of theatre staff and time during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

G E H El-Shallaly1, B Mohammed, M S Muhtaseb, A H Hamouda, A H M Nassar.   

Abstract

During laparoscopy, members of staff spend time setting up and de-activating the light source, camera and insufflator. Voice Recognition Interface (VRI) devices, such as HERMES (Stryker Europe, Montreux, Switzerland), enable the surgeon to perform and control these and other functions. They recognize the surgeon's voice and adjust the instruments in response to programmed verbal commands. The aim of this study was to evaluate HERMES with regards to the utilization of time and theatre staff during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A total of 100 patients were randomized to either HERMES-assisted or standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Three time variables were measured for performing three VRI tasks: (1) The initial setting up of the light source and camera, (2) the activation of the insufflator, and (3) the deactivation of the insufflator and light source at the end of the operation. The mean (and standard deviation) of the time in seconds required for setting up the light source and camera was 27.6 (26.9) in non-HERMES operations and 11.7 (4.7) in HERMES-assisted cases (p<0.001). Insufflation time was 19.8 (13.3) vs. 6.7 (2.5) (p<0.001), and switch-off time was 19.5 (11.8) vs. 11.8 (5.7) (p<0.001). HERMES optimized the operating time and the utilization of theatre staff during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Entities:  

Year:  2005        PMID: 16754183     DOI: 10.1080/13645700500381685

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol        ISSN: 1364-5706            Impact factor:   2.442


  7 in total

1.  Using a depth-sensing infrared camera system to access and manipulate medical imaging from within the sterile operating field.

Authors:  Matt Strickland; Jamie Tremaine; Greg Brigley; Calvin Law
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.089

2.  Toward increased autonomy in the surgical OR: needs, requests, and expectations.

Authors:  Michael Kranzfelder; Christoph Staub; Adam Fiolka; Armin Schneider; Sonja Gillen; Dirk Wilhelm; Helmut Friess; Alois Knoll; Hubertus Feussner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-12-13       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Touchless interaction with software in interventional radiology and surgery: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  André Mewes; Bennet Hensen; Frank Wacker; Christian Hansen
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2016-09-19       Impact factor: 2.924

4.  Use of Artificial Intelligence in Non-Oncologic Interventional Radiology: Current State and Future Directions.

Authors:  Rohil Malpani; Christopher W Petty; Neha Bhatt; Lawrence H Staib; Julius Chapiro
Journal:  Dig Dis Interv       Date:  2021-07-17

Review 5.  Artificial Intelligence in Interventional Radiology.

Authors:  Joseph R Kallini; John M Moriarty
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2022-08-31       Impact factor: 1.780

6.  Use of Commercial Off-The-Shelf Devices for the Detection of Manual Gestures in Surgery: Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Fernando Alvarez-Lopez; Marcelo Fabián Maina; Francesc Saigí-Rubió
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2019-04-14       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 7.  Artificial Intelligence in Interventional Radiology: A Literature Review and Future Perspectives.

Authors:  Roberto Iezzi; S N Goldberg; B Merlino; A Posa; V Valentini; R Manfredi
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2019-11-03       Impact factor: 4.375

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.