Advanced search
Publication Cover
Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy Volume 13, 2013 - Issue 7
Submit an article Journal homepage
107
Views
7
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Theme: Urological Cancer - Special Report

Telemedical technologies in urological cancer care: past, present and future applications

Etai M Bogen Norwegian Centre for Telemedicine and Integrated Care, Tromsø, Norway; Department of Urology, University Hospital of Northern Norway, Tromsø, Norway; Department of Gastrointestinal surgery, University Hospital of Northern Norway, Tromsø, Norway; Virtual Surgical Skills and Simulation Centre, Institute of Cancer, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
,
Erling Aarsæther Department of Urology, University Hospital of Northern Norway, Tromsø, Norway; Norwegian Centre for Telemedicine and Integrated Care, Tromsø, Norway
,
Knut M Augestad Norwegian Centre for Telemedicine and Integrated Care, Tromsø, Norway; Department of Gastrointestinal surgery, University Hospital of Northern Norway, Tromsø, Norway
,
Rolv-Ole Lindsetmo Norwegian Centre for Telemedicine and Integrated Care, Tromsø, Norway; Department of Gastrointestinal surgery, University Hospital of Northern Norway, Tromsø, Norway
&
Hiten RH Patel Norwegian Centre for Telemedicine and Integrated Care, Tromsø, Norway. [email protected]; Department of Urology, University Hospital of Northern Norway, Tromsø, Norway; Department of Gastrointestinal surgery, University Hospital of Northern Norway, Tromsø, Norway; Virtual Surgical Skills and Simulation Centre, Institute of Cancer, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
Pages 795-809 | Published online: 10 Jan 2014

References

  • Guidelines for the surgical practice of telemedicine. Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons. Surg. Endosc. 14, 975–979 (2000).
  • Haidegger T, Sándor J, Benyó Z. Surgery in space: the future of robotic telesurgery. Surg. Endosc. 25(3), 681–690 (2011).
  • Bashshur RL. On the definition and evaluation of telemedicine. Telemed. J. 1(1), 19–30 (1995).
  • Gershon-Cohen J. How rural hospitals can have services of a top-flight x-ray department. Hosp. Manage. 21(70), 116–118 (1950).
  • Augestad KM, Lindsetmo RO. Overcoming distance: video-conferencing as a clinical and educational tool among surgeons. World J. Surg. 33(7), 1356–1365 (2009).
  • Murphy RL Jr, Bird KT. Telediagnosis: a new community health resource. Observations on the feasibility of telediagnosis based on 1000 patient transactions. Am. J. Public Health 64(2), 113–119 (1974).
  • Jarvis-Selinger S, Chan E, Payne R, Plohman K, Ho K. Clinical telehealth across the disciplines: lessons learned. Telemed. J. E. Health. 14(7), 720–725 (2008).
  • Augestad KM, Bellika JG, Budrionis A et al. Surgical telementoring in knowledge translation – clinical outcomes and educational benefits: a comprehensive review. Surg Innov. (2012).
  • Bruschi M, Micali S, Porpiglia F et al. Laparoscopic telementored adrenalectomy: the Italian experience. Surg. Endosc. 19(6), 836–840 (2005).
  • Doarn CR. Telemedicine in tomorrow’s operating room: a natural fit. Semin. Laparosc. Surg. 10(3), 121–126 (2003).
  • Kaczmarek BF, Trinh QD, Menon M, Rogers CG. Tablet telerounding. Urology 80(6), 1383–1388 (2012).
  • Rumpsfeld M, Arild E, Norum J, Breivik E. Telemedicine in haemodialysis: a university department and two remote satellites linked together as one common workplace. J. Telemed. Telecare 11(5), 251–255 (2005).
  • Moseng D. Teledermatology – experiences from Northern Norway. Tidsskr. Nor. Laegeforen. 120(16), 1893–1895 (2000).
  • Nordal EJ, Moseng D, Kvammen B, Løchen ML. A comparative study of teleconsultations versus face-to-face consultations. J. Telemed. Telecare 7(5), 257–265 (2001).
  • Shannon RJ. Telemedicine in wound healing. Int. Wound J. 2(3), 239–240 (2005).
  • Wilbright WA, Birke JA, Patout CA, Varnado M, Horswell R. The use of telemedicine in the management of diabetes-related foot ulceration: a pilot study. Adv. Skin Wound Care 17(5 Pt 1), 232–238 (2004).
  • Jacobs BL, Zhang Y, Tan HJ, Ye Z, Skolarus TA, Hollenbeck BK. Hospitalization trends after prostate and bladder surgery: implications of potential payment reforms. J. Urol. 189(1), 59–65 (2013).
  • Pantanowitz L, Wiley CA, Demetris A et al. Experience with multimodality telepathology at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. J. Pathol. Inform. 3, 45 (2012).
  • Lowrance WT, Scardino PT. Predictive models for newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients. Rev. Urol. 11(3), 117–126 (2009).
  • Lilly CM, Cody S, Zhao H et al.; University of Massachusetts Memorial Critical Care Operations Group. Hospital mortality, length of stay, and preventable complications among critically ill patients before and after tele-ICU reengineering of critical care processes. JAMA 305(21), 2175–2183 (2011).
  • Etzioni DA, Liu JH, Maggard MA, Ko CY. The aging population and its impact on the surgery workforce. Ann. Surg. 238(2), 170–177 (2003).
  • Williams TE Jr, Satiani B, Thomas A, Ellison EC. The impending shortage and the estimated cost of training the future surgical workforce. Ann. Surg. 250(4), 590–597 (2009).
  • Etzioni DA, Finlayson SR, Ricketts TC, Lynge DC, Dimick JB. Getting the science right on the surgeon workforce issue. Arch. Surg. 146(4), 381–384 (2011).
  • Demartines N, Mutter D, Marescaux J, Harder F. Preliminary assessment of the value and effect of expert consultation in telemedicine. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 190(4), 466–470 (2000).
  • Rosser JC Jr, Young SM, Klonsky J. Telementoring: an application whose time has come. Surg. Endosc. 21(8), 1458–1463 (2007).
  • Sterbis JR, Hanly EJ, Herman BC et al. Transcontinental telesurgical nephrectomy using the da Vinci robot in a porcine model. Urology 71(5), 971–973 (2008).
  • Patel VR, Sivaraman A. Current status of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: progress is inevitable. Oncology 26(7), 616–9, 622 (2012).
  • Fabrizio MD, Lee BR, Chan DY et al. Effect of time delay on surgical performance during telesurgical manipulation. J. Endourol. 14(2), 133–138 (2000).
  • Micali S, Virgili G, Vannozzi E et al. Feasibility of telementoring between Baltimore (USA) and Rome (Italy): the first five cases. J. Endourol. 14(6), 493–496 (2000).
  • Santomauro M, Reina GA, Stroup SP, L’Esperance JO. Telementoring in robotic surgery. Curr. Opin. Urol. 23(2), 141–145 (2013).
  • Azuh O, Sen A, Ilan R et al. Heralding new ringtones of patient safety: Blackberry-based clinical communication and telementoring in laparoscopic surgery. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc. 2009, 23 (2009).
  • Antoniou SA, Antoniou GA, Franzen J et al. A comprehensive review of telementoring applications in laparoscopic general surgery. Surg. Endosc. 26(8), 2111–2116 (2012).
  • Cheriff AD, Schulam PG, Docimo SG, Moore RG, Kavoussi LR. Telesurgical consultation. J. Urol. 156(4), 1391–1393 (1996).
  • Eadie LH, Seifalian AM, Davidson BR. Telemedicine in surgery. Br. J. Surg. 90(6), 647–658 (2003).
  • Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M et al. Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature 413(6854), 379–380 (2001).
  • Nguan CY, Morady R, Wang C et al. Robotic pyeloplasty using internet protocol and satellite network-based telesurgery. Int. J. Med. Robot. 4(1), 10–14 (2008).
  • Doarn CR, Anvari M, Low T, Broderick TJ. Evaluation of teleoperated surgical robots in an enclosed undersea environment. Telemed. J. E. Health. 15(4), 325–335 (2009).
  • Savage CJ, Vickers AJ. Low annual caseloads of United States surgeons conducting radical prostatectomy. J. Urol. 182(6), 2677–2679 (2009).
  • Smith CD, Skandalakis JE. Remote presence proctoring by using a wireless remote-control videoconferencing system. Surg. Innov. 12(2), 139–143 (2005).
  • Lendvay TS, Hannaford B, Satava RM. Future of robotic surgery. Cancer J. 19(2), 109–119 (2013).
  • Agarwal R, Levinson AW, Allaf M, Makarov D, Nason A, Su LM. The RoboConsultant: telementoring and remote presence in the operating room during minimally invasive urologic surgeries using a novel mobile robotic interface. Urology 70(5), 970–974 (2007).
  • Gonzalez CM, McKenna P. Challenges facing academic urology training programs: an impending crisis. Urology 81(3), 475–479 (2013).
  • Saliba V, Legido-Quigley H, Hallik R, Aaviksoo A, Car J, McKee M. Telemedicine across borders: a systematic review of factors that hinder or support implementation. Int. J. Med. Inform. 81(12), 793–809 (2012).
  • Augestad KM, Norum J, Dehof S et al. Cost–effectiveness and quality of life in surgeon versus general practitioner-organised colon cancer surveillance: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 3(4) (2013).
  • Kunkler IH, Fielding RG, Brebner J et al. A comprehensive approach for evaluating telemedicine-delivered multidisciplinary breast cancer meetings in southern Scotland. J. Telemed. Telecare 11(Suppl. 1), 71–73 (2005).
  • Vickers AJ, Salz T, Basch E et al. Electronic patient self-assessment and management (SAM): a novel framework for cancer survivorship. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 10, 34 (2010).
  • Kunkler IH, Prescott RJ, Lee RJ et al. TELEMAM: a cluster randomised trial to assess the use of telemedicine in multi-disciplinary breast cancer decision making. Eur. J. Cancer 43(17), 2506–2514 (2007).
  • Bensink M, Wootton R, Irving H et al. Investigating the cost–effectiveness of videotelephone based support for newly diagnosed paediatric oncology patients and their families: design of a randomised controlled trial. BMC Health Serv. Res. 7, 38 (2007).
  • Henderson C, Knapp M, Fernández JL et al.; Whole System Demonstrator evaluation team. Cost effectiveness of telehealth for patients with long term conditions (Whole Systems Demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study): nested economic evaluation in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ 346, f1035 (2013).
  • Tsuchihashi Y. Expanding application of digital pathology in Japan – from education, telepathology to autodiagnosis. Diagn. Pathol. 6(Suppl. 1), S19 (2011).
  • AbuKhousa E, Mohamed N, Al-Jaroodi J. e-Health Cloud: opportunities and challenges. Future Internet 4(4), 621–645 (2012).
  • Robert B. ‘Robots in healthcare’. Industrial Robot 38(3), 218–223 (2011).
  • Hazin R, Qaddoumi I. Teleoncology: current and future applications for improving cancer care globally. Lancet Oncol. 11(2), 204–210 (2010).
  • Hagn U, Konietschke R, Tobergte A.et al. DLR Miro: a versatile system for research in endoscopic telesurgery. Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg. 5(2), 183–193 (2010).

Websites

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.