The use of wearable technology in surgical fields: A systematic review

Öz

Aim: This study was planned to review the studies evaluating the results of using wearable technology in surgical fields, systematically. Methods: The databases of “Pubmed, Web of Science, Scholar Google, Wiley Cochrane, Scopus” were searched with the keywords “wearable technology’’, ‘’technology’’ and ‘’surgical nursing” to reach 1424 articles. 15 studies, published in 2014-2019, in English, with full text and meeting the PRISMA decision criteria, were included in the study. Results: The sample of the studies included in the review was composed of 620 people. It was seen that the sample in the studies consisted of maximum 139 people and minimum 2 people. Among the locations of the studies, 5 of them were the United States, 2 were Germany and Canada as well as England, Korea, Portugal, China, Kuwait, and Belgium. In the studies, wearable devices such as smart glasses (40%), smart wristbands (26.66%) and smartphone, T-shirts, WCDs, headbands, and action cameras (6.66% for each) were used and the application forms were filled in to evaluate the effectiveness of these devices. While the majority of the studies conducted on wearable technology usage were the studies conducted on patients (59.83%) and surgeons (36.12%), 8 of the data were collected during operation and 7 were collected after the operation. Conclusion: Considering the widespread use of technology in surgical fields, it is seen that this situation is more limited in surgical nursing. For this reason, the trends towards the use of wearable technologies in the field of nursing, the development of digital medical systems and the use of electronic health records should be supported.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Wearable technology
• mobile health application
• surgical nursing

Cerrahi alanlarda giyilebilir teknoloji kullanımı: Bir sistematik derleme

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışma, cerrahi alanlarda giyilebilir teknoloji kullanımının sonuçlarını değerlendiren çalışmaları sistematik olarak incelemek amacıyla planlanmıştır. Yöntem: “wearable technology’’, ‘’technology’’ and ‘’surgical nursing” anahtar kelimeleriyle “Pubmed, Web of Science, Scholar Google, Wiley Cochrane, Scopus" veri tabanları taranarak 1424 makaleye ulaşıldı. 2014- 2020 yıllarında yayınlanmış, yayın dili İngilizce olan, tam metni bulunan ve PRISMA karar kriterlerini karşılayan 15 araştırma çalışmaya dâhil edildi. Bulgular: İncelemeye alınan çalışmaların örneklemini 620 kişi oluşturdu. Çalışmalarda örneklemin en fazla 139 en az 2 kişiden oluştuğu görüldü. Araştırmaların yürütüldüğü yerler; 5’i Amerika, 2‘si Almanya ve Kanada olmak üzere İngiltere, Kore, Portekiz, Çin, Kuveyt, Belçika’ydı. Çalışmalarda akıllı gözlük (%40), akıllı bileklik (%26.66) ve her biri %6.66’lık oranlarda akıllı telefon, tişört, WCD, kafa bandı ve aksiyon kamerası gibi giyilebilir cihazlar kullanıldı. Giyilebilir teknoloji kullanımı ile ilgili yapılan araştırmaların çoğunluğunu hasta (%59.83) ve cerrahlar (%36.12) üzerinde yapılan çalışmalar oluştururken; verilerin 8’i ameliyat sırası ve 7’si ameliyat sonrasında toplanıldığı görüldü. Sonuç: Cerrahi alanlarda teknolojinin yaygın kullanımı göz önüne alındığında cerrahi hemşireliğinde bu durumun daha kısıtlı olduğu görülmektedir. Bu nedenle hemşirelik alanında giyilebilir teknolojilerin kullanılması, dijital medikal sistemlerin geliştirilmesi ve elektronik sağlık kayıtlarının kullanılmasına yönelik eğilimler desteklenmelidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• giyilebilir teknoloji
• mobil sağlık uygulaması
• cerrahi hemşireliği

Destekleyen Kurum

Destekleyen kurum bulunmamaktadır.

Kaynakça

1. Wilson D. An Overview of the Application of Wearable Technology to Nursing Practice. Nurs Forum 2017;52: 124-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12177
2. Slade Shantz JA, Veillette CJH. The application of wearable technology in surgery: ensuring the positive impact of the wearable revolution on surgical patients. Front. Surg 2014;1:39. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2014.00039
3. Bove LA. Increasing Patient Engagement Through the Use of Wearable Technology. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners 2019;15(8):535-539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2019.03.018
4. Cannon C. Telehealth, mobile applications, and wearable devices are expanding cancer care beyond walls, Semin Oncol Nurs 2018;34:118-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soncn.2018.03.002
5. Rodgers MM, Pai VM, Conroy RS. Recent advances in wearable sensors for health monitoring, IEEE Sensors J., 15(6):3119-3126. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2014.2357257
6. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:264–9. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135
7. Karaçam Z. Sistematik derleme metodolojisi: sistematik derleme hazırlamak için bir rehber. DEUHYO ED 2013;6:26-33. http://www.deuhyoedergi.org/index.php/DEUHYOED/article/view/57 (Erişim tarihi:10/12/2020).
8. STROBE http://www.healthknowledge.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/interactivel/fae/rct/CASP_11_Questions_for_an_RCT_with_HealthKnowledge_logo.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 20/10/2020).

9. Karaçam Z, Elm E, Altman D, Egger M, Pocock S, Gøtzsche P, Vandenbroucke J. Strobe Bildirimi: Epidemiyolojide Gözlemsel Araştırma Raporu Yazımının Güçlendirilmesi İçin Bir Rehber. Anadolu Hemşirelik ve Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 2014;17(1):64-72. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ataunihem/issue/2664/34705#article_cite (Erişim Tarihi:20/10/2020)
10. CONSORT http://www.consort-statement.org/downloads/translations (Erişim tarihi:20/12/2020).
11. Sultan N. Reflective thoughts on the potential and challenges of wearable technology for healthcare provision and medical education. International Journal of Information Management 2015;35(5):521-526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.04.010
12. Landry EC, Yong M, Pauwels J, Chadha NK. The use of video glasses improved learning of tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy surgery: a randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology 2019;117,12-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2018.10.039
13. Pimentel G, Rodrigues S, Silva PA, Vilarinho A, Vaz R, Cunha JPS. A wearable approach for intraoperative physiological stress monitoring of multiple cooperative surgeons. International Journal of Medical Informatics 2019;129,60-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.05.028
14. Tofte JN, Rojas EO, Anthony CA, Holte AJ, Volkmar AJ, Karam MD, Caldwell LS, Lawler EA. (2019). Intraoperative Point of View Video Capture and Surgical Segmentation in Carpal Tunnel Release: A Feasibility Analysis. J Surg Educ. 2019;76(6):1663-1668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2019.06.004
15. Al Janabi HF, Aydin A, Palaneer S, Macchione N, Al-Jabir A, Khan MS, Dasgupta P, Ahmed K. Effectiveness of the HoloLens mixed-reality headset in minimally invasive surgery: a simulation-based feasibility study. Surg Endosc. 2020;34(3):1143-1149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06862-3
16. Hashimoto, DA, Phitayakorn R, Fernandez-del Castillo, C. et al. A blinded assessment of video quality in wearable technology for telementoring in open surgery: the Google Glass experience. Surg Endosc 2016;30:372-378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4178-x
17. Panda N, Solsky I, Huang EJ, Lipsitz S, Pradarelli JC, Delisle M, Haynes AB. Using smartphones to capture novel recovery metrics after cancer surgery. JAMA surgery 2020;155(2):123-129. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2019.4702
18. Kim C, Ryu S, Yoon J, Lee H, Choi N, Park I, Choi H. See-Through Type 3D Head-Mounted Display–Based Surgical Microscope System for Microsurgery: A Feasibility Study, JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2019;7(3):e11251. https://mhealth.jmir.org/2019/3/e11251
19. Millstine DM, Bhagra A, Jenkins SM, et al. Use of a Wearable EEG Headband as a Meditation Device for Women With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Integrative Cancer Therapies. 2019;18. doi:10.1177/1534735419878770
20. Thijs I, Fresiello L, Oosterlinck W, Sinnaeve P, Rega F. Assessment of Physical Activity by Wearable Technology During Rehabilitation After Cardiac Surgery: Explorative Prospective Monocentric Observational Cohort Study JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2019;7(1):e9865 https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.9865
21. Borgmann H, Rodríguez Socarrás M, Salem J. et al. Feasibility and safety of augmented reality-assisted urological surgery using smartglass. World J Urol 2017;35:967–972. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1956-6
22. Daskivich TJ, Houman J, Lopez M, et al. Association of Wearable Activity Monitors With Assessment of Daily Ambulation and Length of Stay Among Patients Undergoing Major Surgery. JAMA Netw Open 2019;2(2):e187673. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.7673
23. Nikouline A, Jimenez M, Okrainec A. Feasibility of remote administration of the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery (FLS) skills test using Google wearable device. Surgical Endoscopy, 2020;34(1): 443-449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06788-w
24. Wu JM, Ho TW, Chang YT, Hsu C, Tsai CJ, Lai F, Lin MT. Wearable-based mobile health app in gastric cancer patients for postoperative physical activity monitoring: focus group study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 2019;7(4):e11989. https://doi.org/10.2196/11989
25. Heimeshoff J, Merz C, Ricklefs M, Kirchhoff F, Haverich A, Bara C, Kühn C. Wearable cardioverter–defibrillators following cardiac surgery-a single-center experience. The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon 2019;67(02): 092-097. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1660802
26. Symer MM, Abelson JS, Milsom J, McClure B, Yeo HL. A mobile health application to track patients after gastrointestinal surgery: results from a pilot study. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2017;21(9):1500-1505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-017-3482-2
27. Hiranaka T, Nakanishi Y, Fujishiro T, Hida Y, Tsubosaka M, Shibata Y, Uemoto H. The Use of Smart Glasses for Surgical Video Streaming. Surgical Innovation 2017;24(2):151–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350616685431
28. Babar-Craig H, Banfield G, Knight J. Prevalence of back and neck pain amongst ENT consultants: national survey. J Laryngol Otol. 2003;117(12):979-982. https://doi.org/10.1258/002221503322683885
29. Iqbal MH, Aydin A, Brunckhorst O, Dasgupta P, Ahmed K. A review of wearable technology in medicine. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 2016;109(10):372–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/0141076816663560
30. Brewer ZE, Fann HC, Ogden WD, Burdon TA, Sheikh AY. Inheriting the learner’s view: a Google Glass-based wearable computing platform for improving surgical trainee performance. J Surg Educ 2016;73:682–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.02.005
31. Tran Y, Wijesuriya N, Tarvainen M, Karjalainen P. Craig The relationship between spectral changes in heart rate variability and fatigue J. Psychophysiol 2009;23(3):143-151. https://doi.org/10.1027/0269-8803.23.3.143
32. Patel MS, Patel N, Small DS, Rosin R, Rohrbach JI, Stromberg N, et al. Change in length of stay and readmissions among hospitalized medical patients after inpatient medicine service adoption of mobile secure text messaging. J Gen Intern Med 2016;31:863–870. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-016-3673-7