Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorLuengo Gómez, David
dc.contributor.authorSalmerón Ruíz, Ángela
dc.contributor.authorRomero Manjón, María Isabel
dc.contributor.authorMedina Benítez, Antonio
dc.contributor.authorLáinez Ramos-Bossini, Antonio Jesús
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-08T08:15:42Z
dc.date.available2025-01-08T08:15:42Z
dc.date.issued2024-12-13
dc.identifier.citationLuengo Gómez, D. et. al. Volume 2024, Article ID 1482326. [https://doi.org/10.1155/ijta/1482326]es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10481/98624
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Telerobotic ultrasound has emerged as a promising technology in medicine, especially in settings with limited medical access or a lack of specialized personnel. However, there are very few studies evaluating its usefulness in real-world clinical practice. Objective: This study evaluates the usefulness of abdominopelvic telerobotic ultrasound in a real-world practice setting. Methods: A prospective study was performed in a cohort of adult patients who underwent abdominal ultrasound in a remote secondary hospital for suspected abdominal or pelvic pathology. Examinations were performed by an on-site technician and a remote abdominal radiologist. Satisfaction of patients and explorers, scan times, quality of visualization of anatomical structures, and ultrasound findings were measured and compared with standard ultrasound examinations performed by an onsite radiologist blinded to telerobotic ultrasound findings. Multivariate analyses were performed to predict variables related to the visualization quality of abdominopelvic organs. Results: The sample included 40 patients (60% women; mean age, 51 2 ± 16 1 years; 35% overweight and 17.5% obese). Significant differences in ultrasound duration were observed between telerobotic ultrasound and standard ultrasound (27 4 ± 8 3 and 12 7 ± 3 1 min, respectively; p < 0 001). The mean satisfaction of radiologists, technicians, and patients with telerobotic ultrasound was high (7 35 ± 1 14 for radiologists, 7 93 ± 0 83 for technicians, and 8 43 ± 1 38 for patients). Visualization of anatomical structures was acceptable for most organs on telerobotic ultrasound but significantly worse than conventional ultrasound when “excellent visualization” was the reference standard. In addition, telerobotic ultrasound did not identify potentially relevant findings in a significant (70%) proportion of patients. Conclusions: Telerobotic ultrasound offers acceptable results in the assessment of abdominopelvic organs and can help provide adequate healthcare to patients in locations with limited access to radiology specialists. However, there are significant limitations compared to standard ultrasound for their optimal evaluation.es_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipUniversidad de Granada/CBUAes_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherWiley Online Libraryes_ES
dc.rightsAtribución 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subjectabdomen es_ES
dc.subjecttelemedicinees_ES
dc.subjectteleradiologyes_ES
dc.titleTelerobotic Versus Standard Ultrasound in the Assessment of the Abdomen and Pelvis: A Real-World Prospective Studyes_ES
dc.typejournal articlees_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1155/ijta/1482326
dc.type.hasVersionVoRes_ES


Ficheros en el ítem

[PDF]

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Atribución 4.0 Internacional
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como Atribución 4.0 Internacional