Inheriting the Learner’s View: A Google Glass-Based Wearable Computing Platform for Improving Surgical Trainee Performance

Brewer, Zachary E.; Fann, Hutchinson C.; Ogden, W. D.; Burdon, Thomas A.; Sheikh, Ahmad Y.

doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.02.005

Cited by 46 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There were 9 published studies on simulated procedures in the area of general surgery, for purposes such as live imaging via ultrasound and endoscopy, intraoperative guidance for needle placement, navigation for general surgeries, intubation, and radio‐frequency ablation…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Augmented reality for the surgeon: Systematic review

Yoon

Chen

Kim

et al. 2018

Robotics Computer Surgery

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Augmented reality for the surgeon: Systematic review

Yoon

Chen

Kim

et al. 2018

Robotics Computer Surgery

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sample sizes of participants who wore Google Glass ranged from N=1 to N=40. In all, 25 of 31 studies (81%) were conducted under real-time conditions or actual clinical care settings [ 12 , 14 - 16 , 18 - 20 , 23 - 38 , 40 , 42 ], whereas the other six (19%) were conducted under simulated environments [ 13 , 17 , 21 , 22 , 39 , 41 ]. In addition, 26 studies (84%) were pilot or feasibility studies [ 12 , 13 , 16 - 21 , 23 , 25 , 26 , 28 - 42 ], three (10%) were case studies [ 14 , 15 , 27 ], and two (6%) were randomized controlled trials [ 22 , 24 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Google Glass in Surgical Settings: Systematic Review

Wei¹,

Dougherty²,

Myers³

et al. 2018

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIn recent years, wearable devices have become increasingly attractive and the health care industry has been especially drawn to Google Glass because of its ability to serve as a head-mounted wearable device. The use of Google Glass in surgical settings is of particular interest due to the hands-free device potential to streamline workflow and maintain sterile conditions in an operating room environment.ObjectiveThe aim is to conduct a systematic evaluation of the literature on the feasibility and acceptability of using Google Glass in surgical settings and to assess the potential benefits and limitations of its application.MethodsThe literature was searched for articles published between January 2013 and May 2017. The search included the following databases: PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO (EBSCO), and IEEE Xplore. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts and assessed full-text articles. Original research articles that evaluated the feasibility, usability, or acceptability of using Google Glass in surgical settings were included. This review was completed following the Preferred Reporting Results of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.ResultsOf the 520 records obtained, 31 met all predefined criteria and were included in this review. Google Glass was used in various surgical specialties. Most studies were in the United States (23/31, 74%) and all were conducted in hospital settings: 29 in adult hospitals (29/31, 94%) and two in children’s hospitals (2/31, 7%). Sample sizes of participants who wore Google Glass ranged from 1 to 40. Of the 31 studies, 25 (81%) were conducted under real-time conditions or actual clinical care settings, whereas the other six (19%) were conducted under simulated environment. Twenty-six studies were pilot or feasibility studies (84%), three were case studies (10%), and two were randomized controlled trials (6%). The majority of studies examined the potential use of Google Glass as an intraoperative intervention (27/31, 87%), whereas others observed its potential use in preoperative (4/31, 13%) and postoperative settings (5/31, 16%). Google Glass was utilized as a videography and photography device (21/31, 68%), a vital sign monitor (6/31, 19%), a surgical navigation display (5/31, 16%), and as a videoconferencing tool to communicate with remote surgeons intraoperatively (5/31, 16%). Most studies reported moderate or high acceptability of using Google Glass in surgical settings. The main reported limitations of using Google Glass utilization were short battery life (8/31, 26%) and difficulty with hands-free features (5/31, 16%).ConclusionsThere are promising feasibility and usability data of using Google Glass in surgical settings with particular benefits for surgical education and training. Despite existing technical limitations, Google Glass was generally well received and several studies in surgical settings acknowledged its potential for training, consultation, patient monitoring, and a...

show abstract

“…As such, the experiment tested PM, or remembering to complete an action in the future, in contrast to prior studies on embodied learning that assessed learning through retrospective memory, or recollection of past actions or knowledge (Johnson-Glenberg et al, 2016;Kontra et al, 2015). Additionally, while research in the medical field with smart glasses has seen more positive results with hands on training, participants were instructed predominantly on use of motor skills and high-level psychomotor functions (Brewer et al, 2016;Iversen et al, 2016). This fundamental difference in experimental design -the type of learning assessed -may provide one explanation for why physically interacting with the training material was less effective at promoting handwashing frequency, especially considering theories on embodied cleansing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This research has encompassed patient interactions, treatment skills, and anatomy (Benninger, 2015;Iversen, Kiami, Singh, Masiello, & von Heideken, 2016;Son et al, 2017). For example, in a simulated operative setting designed to assess learned motor skills, surgery residents achieved lower error scores with needle placement after training with smart glasses compared to receiving directions only from an instructor (15 ± 4 vs. 18 ± 5, p < 0.05) (Brewer, Fann, Ogden, Burdon, & Sheikh, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Smart Glasses-based Foodservice Training: An Embodied Learning Theory Approach

Clark

Pellegrino²,

Shabatura

2019

CJLT / RCAT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study evaluated simulated, hands on foodservice training delivered through smart glasses compared to passive, strictly video-based training. Handwashing performance variables, including frequency and efficacy, were measured along with post-training reactions. Participants in the strictly video-based group (N = 24) were four times more likely to wash hands than the smart glasses group (N = 25), (95% CI: 1.129 - 14.175). This research highlights how simulation training of handwashing with smart glasses can result in poorer learning outcomes compared to traditional training methods, potentially due to the psychological effects of hand cleansing. The observed training outcomes may also show the need to improve smart glasses-based training by finding ways to decrease attention demands and implementing augmented reality intelligence systems that can enforce training outcomes. Future research should utilize longitudinal studies to determine the impact of smart glasses-based training on food safety behavior habit formation. La présente étude a évalué une formation en service alimentaire active et appliquée, livrée par l’entremise de lunettes intelligentes, comparativement à une formation passive strictement basée sur la vidéo. Des variables de rendement relatives au lavage des mains ont été mesurées, y compris la fréquence et l’efficacité. Les participants du groupe dont la formation était strictement basée sur la vidéo (N = 24) étaient quatre fois plus susceptibles de se laver les mains que les participants du groupe aux lunettes intelligentes (N = 25), (95 % IC : 1,129 – 14,175). Les résultats soulignent que la formation par lunettes intelligentes dans laquelle les participants s’exercent à se laver les mains peut entraîner de moins bons résultats d’apprentissage que les méthodes de formation traditionnelles. Cela peut être dû à : a) la nature du contenu pédagogique, dans lequel la mémoire prospective intervient, comparativement à des études préalables avec l’apprentissage incarné et les lunettes intelligentes, qui ont évalué la mémoire rétrospective et les fonctions motrices, ou b) aux effets psychologiques sur la mémoire dont le groupe aux lunettes intelligentes aurait fait l’expérience durant la formation. Des études futures pourraient explorer l’effet de la formation par simulation à l’aide de lunettes intelligentes sur d’autres tâches de service alimentaire.

show abstract

Inheriting the Learner’s View: A Google Glass-Based Wearable Computing Platform for Improving Surgical Trainee Performance

Cited by 46 publications

References 8 publications

Augmented reality for the surgeon: Systematic review

Augmented reality for the surgeon: Systematic review

Using Google Glass in Surgical Settings: Systematic Review

Assessing Smart Glasses-based Foodservice Training: An Embodied Learning Theory Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About