Copyright
©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Methodol. Jul 20, 2022; 12(4): 274-284
Published online Jul 20, 2022. doi: 10.5662/wjm.v12.i4.274
Published online Jul 20, 2022. doi: 10.5662/wjm.v12.i4.274
Strongly disagree | Somewhat disagree | Neither disagree nor agree | Somewhat agree | Strongly agree | |
I was worried to undergo this procedure | 0 (0) | 7 (33.4) | 2 (9.5) | 12 (57.1) | 0 (0) |
I felt comfortable during the procedure | 0 (0) | 1 (4.8) | 1 (4.8) | 18 (85.6) | 1 (4.8) |
I felt no difference between this and conventional ultrasound | 0 (0) | 8 (38.1) | 5 (23.8) | 8 (38.1) | 0 (0) |
I felt comfortable knowing that doctor is controlling the robot | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 13 (61.9) | 8 (38.1) |
I will trust the results of this technology | 0 (0) | 5 (23.8) | 6 (28.6) | 10 (47.6) | 0 (0) |
I understand how the procedure took place | 0 (0) | 7 (33.4) | 11 (52.4) | 3 (14.3) | 0 (0) |
I felt less pressure on my body in comparison to conventional ultrasound | 0 (0) | 7 (33.33) | 7 (33.33) | 7 (33.33) | 0 (0) |
I would like to use this technology in future | 0 (0) | 2 (9.5) | 4 (19.1) | 12 (57.1) | 3 (14.3) |
I would recommend this technology to others | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 4 (19.1) | 14 (66.6) | 3 (14.3) |
Overall rating | Average: 6.2 |
Strongly disagree | Somewhat disagree | Neither disagree nor agree | Somewhat agree | Strongly agree | |
I could use the system easily | 0 (0) | 5 (23.8) | 1 (4.8) | 15 (71.4) | 0 (0) |
I have understanding of the working of the system | 0 (0) | 3 (14.3) | 0 (0) | 18 (85.7) | 0 (0) |
I could learn to use the system with more trials | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 8 (38.1) | 13 (61.9) |
I would like to use the system over conventional system | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 8(38.1) | 13(61.9) | 0 (0) |
I feel the system is precise, safe, and effective | 0 (0) | 1 (4.8) | 6 (28.6) | 11 (52.4) | 3 (14.2) |
In case of errors, I was able to handle them with ease | 0 (0) | 11 (52.4) | 4 (19) | 6 (28.6) | 0 (0) |
I was not concerned about the safety of the patient during the procedure | 0 (0) | 7 (33.3) | 0 (0) | 13 (61.9) | 1 (4.8) |
I feel the user interface is useful | 0 (0) | 1 (4.8) | 5 (23.8) | 15 (71.4) | 0 (0) |
I trust the results of the system | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 4 (19.05) | 13 (61.9) | 4 (19.05) |
Overall rating | Average: 6.38 |
Patient | Conventional hand-held (min) | Robotic arm (min) |
1 | 3 | 17 |
2 | 5 | 17 |
3 | 5 | 17 |
4 | 3 | 15 |
6 | 2 | 10 |
7 | 4 | 9 |
8 | 4 | 8 |
9 | 7 | 6 |
10 | 4 | 9 |
11 | 4 | 6 |
12 | 5 | 5 |
13 | 6 | 8 |
14 | 3 | 8 |
15 | 4 | 6 |
16 | 3 | 5 |
17 | 4 | 4 |
18 | 5 | 4 |
19 | 3 | 7 |
20 | 5 | 6 |
21 | 3 | 8 |
- Citation: Chandrashekhara SH, Rangarajan K, Agrawal A, Thulkar S, Gamanagatti S, Raina D, Saha SK, Arora C. Robotic ultrasound: An initial feasibility study. World J Methodol 2022; 12(4): 274-284
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2222-0682/full/v12/i4/274.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v12.i4.274