October 5th, 2009 by Dr. Val Jones in Humor, True Stories
No Comments »
Health IT is valuable in many ways and I do believe it will revolutionize how we practice medicine. However, we’ve got a long way to go yet, especially in auto-translating English into other languages. This short exercise in English-Spanish translation (through a computer software program) reminds me of how far off “seamless” health technology really is…
(My mother is fully bilingual in Spanish and English and decided to test the auto-translator service with a sentence from a book. Here is the result:)
ENGLISH: He popped a deep-fried sardine into his mouth and washed it down with a few swallows of beer.
LITERAL TRANSLATION OF SPANISH RESULT: He punctured a sardine fried deep in his mouth, and he laundered it near the bottom along with some swallows (referring to the birds) made of beer.
September 28th, 2009 by Berci in Better Health Network, News
No Comments »
Obviously not, but it can provide us with some new solutions. That’s why I wanted to share askCH, an interesting project.
AskCH is a one-of-a-kind healthcare tool. Send a healthcare cost or definition question in the proper format, and receive the answer with a link to find detailed information!
Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at ScienceRoll*
September 20th, 2009 by Medgadget in Better Health Network, News
No Comments »
Here is a project from the folks at the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Imperial College London, and its Mechatronics in Medicine Laboratory, who are bent on developing an “active robot designed to take blood samples from the ante-cubital fossa…”
The Bloodbot identifies the location of a suitable vein by pressing a probe against the surface tissue of the ante-cubital fossa and measuring the force on the probe. The difference in the characteristics of the tissue from its surroundings, in response to the applied force, indicates the presence of a vein.
Once a suitable vein has been found, it inserts a needle under force control. When the needle penetrates the vein (identified by its force/position profile), the control system prevents further insertion, thus avoiding overshooting the vein.
We think they need to combine this robot with VeinViewer for a more accurate, and probably spookier, experience.
The Bloodbot Project…
Flashbacks: VeinViewer Shipped!; First Hospital To Use The VeinViewer ; Video of VeinViewer; VeinViewer Off to Europe; Vein Contrast Enhancer
(hat tip: DVICE)
*This blog post was originally published at Medgadget*
September 17th, 2009 by Paul Auerbach, M.D. in Better Health Network, Opinion
No Comments »
This past December (2008), there was a report in Healthcare IT (Information Technology) News that got me thinking, of all things, about medical situations in outdoor wilderness environments. The substance of the report was that researchers at Vanderbilt University (I worked there in the late ’80s as Chief of the Division of Emergency Medicine) “found that physicians who receive training in a technology-rich environment, but go on to work in a less modern facility feel they can’t provide safe, efficient care.”
The study related to information technology, but is probably applicable to many other modes of technology. As it was reported, the Vanderbilt study included more than 300 medical training graduates. Of those who “were working in an environment with less IT,” some 80 percent reported “feeling less able…to work efficiently, to share and communicate information, and to work effectively within the local system.” The lead investigator Kevin Johnson, MD explained that “going from being a medical student where somebody is always watching after you to a role where you could potentially make a mistake that could actually harm a patient is already hard enough.” But “when you get there and realize that the systems they have are less functional and less pervasive…there is an entirely new set of challenges.”
To all medical students, residency graduates, or anyone else who moves from a highly supervised environment to one where you are on your own, welcome to the club. The whole point of learning how to be self-sufficient is to be able to go it alone when the need arises. What is most striking about wilderness medicine is the notion that one moves to a setting that is austere and resources (people, technology, supplies, communication, etc.) are frequently limited. This can be very unsettling for experienced practitioners, and is even more so for neophytes.
We live in an age of technological imperative. Doctors train in hospitals with large, complex intensive care units. The emergency department is equipped with all the latest gadgets, and specialists are on call 24 by 7 to help out when a difficult or puzzling situation arises. That is not the case in the wilderness, on the battlefield, or out at sea. Expectations change from perfection to doing enough to get the patient to a higher level of care, or just to make it through the hour, let alone the next day.
Think about it. Take your favorite medical instrument(s) and think about how you would practice if you didn’t have access to it. Could you diagnose heart failure without a stethoscope and pulse oximeter? High altitude cerebral edema without a CT scan? Septic shock without a blood pressure monitor, central venous catheter, arterial blood gas measurements, and a battery of laboratory tests? I think the answer is “yes” if you were properly trained.
Technology is good. In fact, it is great. Patients are better off for the ability of health care professionals to apply all manner of diagnostic and interventional devices and techniques. However, I believe that at the same time we are all taught how to do things in the city, we should learn how we must sometimes do them in the country.
image courtesy of cdneverest2008.com
This post, Physicians Should Learn How To Practice Medicine With And Without Technology, was originally published on
Healthine.com by Paul Auerbach, M.D..
September 11th, 2009 by Medgadget in Better Health Network, News
No Comments »
A new microfluidic device from the University of Southampton, called single-cell impedance cytometer, is being reported in Lab on a Chip. The technology promises to perform a white blood cell differential count in a tiny package from a puny sample.
According to Dr David Holmes of ECS, lead author of the paper, the microfluidic set-up uses miniaturised electrodes inside a small channel. The electrical properties of each blood cell are measured as the blood flows through the device. From these measurements it is possible to distinguish and count the different types of cell, providing information used in the diagnosis of numerous diseases.
The system, which can identify the three main types of white blood cells – T lymphocytes, monocytes and neutrophils, is faster and cheaper than current methods.
‘At the moment if an individual goes to the doctor complaining of feeling unwell, a blood test will be taken which will need to be sent away to the lab while the patient awaits the results,’ said Professor Morgan. ‘Our new prototype device may allow point-of-care cell analysis which aids the GP in diagnosing acute diseases while the patient is with the GP, so a treatment strategy may be devised immediately. Our method provides more control and accuracy than what is currently on the market for GP testing.
The next step for the team is to integrate the red blood cell and platelet counting into the device. Their ultimate aim is to set up a company to produce a handheld device which would be available for about £1,000 and which could use disposable chips costing just a few pence each.
Full story: Device being developed for on-the-spot blood analysis…
Abstract in Lab on a Chip: Leukocyte analysis and differentiation using high speed microfluidic single cell impedance cytometry
*This blog post was originally published at Medgadget*
