指南为现代医学的诊断和治疗提供指导。各种移动设备用于表示潜在的复杂决策树。时间紧迫的决定的一个例子是在大规模伤亡事件的情况下进行分类。
在这项随机对照交叉研究中,评估了增强现实用于指南呈现的潜力,并将其与作为传统设备的平板电脑中提供的指南呈现进行了比较.
设计了一个特定的Android应用程序,用于与智能眼镜和平板电脑配合使用,以演示分类算法作为复杂指南的示例。40名志愿者根据30个虚构的患者描述模拟了分诊,每个都有来自智能眼镜和平板电脑的技术支持,在交叉试验设计。在两个设备之间记录并比较做出决定的时间和准确性。
由40名志愿者进行总共2400次评估。平板电脑总共实现了明显更快的分诊时间(中位数12.8秒,IQR9.4-17.7;95%CI14.1-14.9)与智能眼镜分诊相比(中位数17.5秒,IQR13.2-22.8,95%CI18.4-19.2;P=.001)。考虑到两种设备之间的分诊时间差异,在评估过程中,智能眼镜所需的额外时间可以大大减少(21.5秒,IQR16.5-27.3,95%CI21.6-23.2)在第一次运行中,第二次运行17.4秒(IQR13-22.4,95%CI17.6-18.9),和14.9秒(IQR11.7-18.6,95%CI15.2-16.3)在第三次运行(P=.001)。关于准则决定的准确性,两种设备之间没有显着差异。
在平板电脑上以及通过增强现实的指南的呈现取得了良好的效果。由于其更复杂的操作概念,使用智能眼镜的实施需要更多的时间,但可以在适应后的研究过程中加速。特别是在非时间关键的工作区域,免提接口是有用的,增强现实的指南演示在临床管理中可能非常有用.
Guidelines provide instructions for diagnostics and therapy in modern medicine. Various mobile devices are used to represent the potential complex decision trees. An example of time-critical decisions is triage in case of a mass casualty incident.
In this randomized controlled crossover study, the potential of augmented reality for
guideline presentation was evaluated and compared with the
guideline presentation provided in a tablet PC as a conventional device.
A specific Android app was designed for use with smart glasses and a tablet PC for the presentation of a triage algorithm as an example for a complex guideline. Forty volunteers simulated a triage based on 30 fictional patient descriptions, each with technical support from smart glasses and a tablet PC in a crossover trial design. The time to come to a decision and the accuracy were recorded and compared between both devices.
A total of 2400 assessments were performed by the 40 volunteers. A significantly faster time to triage was achieved in total with the tablet PC (median 12.8 seconds, IQR 9.4-17.7; 95% CI 14.1-14.9) compared to that to triage with smart glasses (median 17.5 seconds, IQR 13.2-22.8, 95% CI 18.4-19.2; P=.001). Considering the difference in the triage time between both devices, the additional time needed with the smart glasses could be reduced significantly in the course of assessments (21.5 seconds, IQR 16.5-27.3, 95% CI 21.6-23.2) in the first run, 17.4 seconds (IQR 13-22.4, 95% CI 17.6-18.9) in the second run, and 14.9 seconds (IQR 11.7-18.6, 95% CI 15.2-16.3) in the third run (P=.001). With regard to the accuracy of the
guideline decisions, there was no significant difference between both the devices.
The presentation of a
guideline on a tablet PC as well as through augmented reality achieved good results. The implementation with smart glasses took more time owing to their more complex operating concept but could be accelerated in the course of the study after adaptation. Especially in a non-time-critical working area where hands-free interfaces are useful, a guideline presentation with augmented reality can be of great use during clinical management.