ArticleApplied clinical informatics2020
Evaluating Usability of a Touchless Image Viewer in the Operating Room.
Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- The implementation of artificial intelligence in upper extremity surgery: a systematic review.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Pooled it
- Agile, Easily Applicable, and Useful eHealth Usability Evaluations: Systematic Review and Expert-Validation.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Pooled it
- Contagious infection-free medical interaction system with machine vision controlled by remote hand gesture during an operation.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Article
- Human-Device Interaction in the Life Science Laboratory.Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology · 2022Article
- Human Factors and Organizational Issues in Health Informatics: Innovations and Opportunities.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2021Review
- [Digital OR].Der Unfallchirurg · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAvailability of patient-specific image data, gathered from preoperatively conducted studies, like computed tomography scans and magnetic resonance imaging studies, during a surgical procedure is a key factor for surgical success and patient safety. Several alternative input methods, including recognition of hand gestures, have been proposed for surgeons to interact with medical image viewers during an operation. Previous studies pointed out the need for usability evaluation of these systems.
objectivesWe describe the accuracy and usability of a novel software system, which integrates gesture recognition via machine learning into an established image viewer.
methodsThis pilot study is a prospective, observational trial, which asked surgeons to interact with software to perform two standardized tasks in a sterile environment, modeled closely to a real-life situation in an operating room. To assess usability, the validated "System Usability Scale" (SUS) was used. On a technical level, we also evaluated the accuracy of the underlying neural network.
resultsThe neural network reached 98.94% accuracy while predicting the gestures during validation. Eight surgeons with an average of 6.5 years of experience participated in the usability study. The system was rated on average with 80.25 points on the SUS.
conclusionThe system showed good overall usability; however, additional areas of potential improvement were identified and further usability studies are needed. Because the system uses standard PC hardware, it made for easy integration into the operating room.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.