iemailrobi
iemailrobi t1_ir897bp wrote
Reply to comment by t3rmina1 in Humans operating on humans are still better than robots operating on humans...even when a human is operating the robot. by Notreallyonreddityet
The other study referenced is national data from insurance claims and vail I dated with another national study using the Medicare database. With thousands of patients and taking all comers it’s a bit difficult to refute, no?
iemailrobi t1_ir890ad wrote
Reply to comment by PsychoEngineer in Humans operating on humans are still better than robots operating on humans...even when a human is operating the robot. by Notreallyonreddityet
It’s the pearldiver insurance database and propensity matched with thousands of patients in each cohort. Likely the data is true and complications are in many cases 2-4x higher. Shocking
iemailrobi t1_ir5176l wrote
Reply to comment by PsychoEngineer in Humans operating on humans are still better than robots operating on humans...even when a human is operating the robot. by Notreallyonreddityet
I know. Unfortunately that’s what the large scale papers and research are showing that they worsen the results of surgery. At least at this point. One day you’d imagine that’ll change.
iemailrobi t1_ir3qeb2 wrote
Reply to comment by icefire555 in Humans operating on humans are still better than robots operating on humans...even when a human is operating the robot. by Notreallyonreddityet
No doubt. As the inventor of the TrackX technology, I couldn’t agree with you more that to be effective the robot has to either add functionality that the human doesn’t have (tremor dampening as the Da Vinci does, or simultaneous multi-planer viewing as with TrackX) or take difficult tasks and make them simpler or quicker. Ideally it does all 3. Design is critical. As a rule, less is more and simplicity and resisting adding functionality make a better device. And making people acquire new skills rather than seamlessly merging into their historic workflow is a massive headwind to adoption. Totally agree that we can solve problems when the right engineer appreciates the problem and incorporates these rules of adoption.
iemailrobi t1_ir3m36s wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in Humans operating on humans are still better than robots operating on humans...even when a human is operating the robot. by Notreallyonreddityet
Great point and for soft tissue work, Da Vinci is unparalleled. Unfortunately to make it so, it is nimble and agile and completely useless for the manual labor that defines orthopedics. It is a testament that if you design something well you often also define it / pigeon hole it. And in the case of orthopedics and spine, these tools aren’t up to the job.
iemailrobi t1_ire3jiq wrote
Reply to comment by bewbs_and_stuff in Humans operating on humans are still better than robots operating on humans...even when a human is operating the robot. by Notreallyonreddityet
No, our idea is that there needs to be at lease 2 kinds of robots. One for soft tissue and one for more “dramatic” ortho-type surgery. But confirmation for X-ray guided procedures is a must https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tftObMt18OY