Perceptions About Augmented Reality in Remote Medical Care: Interview Study of Emergency Telemedicine Providers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) have increasingly appeared in the medical literature in the past decade, with AR recently being studied for its potential role in remote health care delivery and communication. Recent literature describes AR's implementation in real-time telemedicine contexts across multiple specialties and settings, with remote emergency services in particular using AR to enhance disaster support and simulation education. Despite the introduction of AR in the medical literature and its potential to shape the future of remote medical services, studies have yet to investigate the perspectives of telemedicine providers regarding this novel technology. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand the applications and challenges of AR in telemedicine anticipated by emergency medicine providers with a range of experiences in using telemedicine and AR or VR technology. METHODS: Across 10 academic medical institutions, 21 emergency medicine providers with variable exposures to telemedicine and AR or VR technology were recruited for semistructured interviews via snowball sampling. The interview questions focused on various potential uses of AR, anticipated obstacles that prevent its implementation in the telemedicine area, and how providers and patients might respond to its introduction. We included video demonstrations of a prototype using AR during the interviews to elicit more informed and complete insights regarding AR's potential in remote health care. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed via thematic coding. RESULTS: Our study identified 2 major areas of use for AR in telemedicine. First, AR is perceived to facilitate information gathering by enhancing observational tasks such as visual examination and granting simultaneous access to data and remote experts. Second, AR is anticipated to supplement distance learning of both minor and major procedures and nonprocedural skills such as cue recognition and empathy for patients and trainees. AR may also supplement long-distance education programs and thereby support less specialized medical facilities. However, the addition of AR may exacerbate the preexisting financial, structural, and literacy barriers to telemedicine. Providers seek value demonstrated by extensive research on the clinical outcome, satisfaction, and financial benefits of AR. They also seek institutional support and early training before adopting novel tools such as AR. Although an overall mixed reception is anticipated, consumer adoption and awareness are key components in AR's adoption. CONCLUSIONS: AR has the potential to enhance the ability to gather observational and medical information, which would serve a diverse set of applications in remote health care delivery and education. However, AR faces obstacles similar to those faced by the current telemedicine technology, such as lack of access, infrastructure, and familiarity. This paper discusses the potential areas of investigation that would inform future studies and approaches to implementing AR in telemedicine.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».