SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Paro JA, Nazareli R, Gurjala A, Berger A, Lee GK. Ann. Plast. Surg. 2015; 74 Suppl 1: S71-4.

Affiliation

From the Division of Plastic Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins)

DOI

10.1097/SAP.0000000000000423

PMID

25664407

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Professionals in a variety of specialties use video-based review as a method of constant self-evaluation. We believe critical self-reflection will allow a surgical trainee to identify methods for improvement throughout residency and beyond. We have used 2 new popular technologies to evaluate their role in accomplishing the previously mentioned objectives.

METHODS: Our group investigated Google Glass and GoPro cameras. Medical students, residents, and faculty were invited to wear each of the devices during a scheduled operation. After the case, each participant was asked to comment on a number of features of the device including comfort, level of distraction/interference with operating, ease of video acquisition, and battery life. Software and hardware specifications were compiled and compared by the authors. A "proof-of-concept" was also performed using the video-conferencing abilities of Google Glass to perform a simulated flap check.

RESULTS: The technical specifications of the 2 cameras favor GoPro over Google Glass. Glass records in 720p with 5-MP still shots, and the GoPro records in 1080p with 12-MP still shots. Our tests of battery life showed more than 2 hours of continuous video with GoPro, and less than 1 hour for Glass. Favorable features of Google Glass included comfort and relative ease of use; they could not comfortably wear loupes while operating, and would have preferred longer hands-free video recording. The GoPro was slightly more cumbersome and required a nonsterile team member to activate all pictures or video; however, loupes could be worn. Google Glass was successfully used in the hospital for a simulated flap check, with overall audio and video being transmitted-fine detail was lost, however.

CONCLUSIONS: There are benefits and limitations to each of the devices tested. Google Glass is in its infancy and may gain a larger intraoperative role in the future. We plan to use Glass as a way for trainees to easily acquire intraoperative footage as a means to "review tape" and will use the GoPro to amass a video library of commonly performed operations.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print