Skip to main content
×
Home

Do You See What I See? Insights from Using Google Glass for Disaster Telemedicine Triage

  • Mark X. Cicero (a1), Barbara Walsh (a2), Yauheni Solad (a3), Travis Whitfill (a1), Geno Paesano (a1), Kristin Kim (a1), Carl R. Baum (a1) and David C. Cone (a4)...
Abstract
Abstract Introduction

Disasters are high-stakes, low-frequency events. Telemedicine may offer a useful adjunct for paramedics performing disaster triage. The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility of telemedicine in disaster triage, and to determine whether telemedicine has an effect on the accuracy of triage or the time needed to perform triage.

Methods

This is a feasibility study in which an intervention team of two paramedics used the mobile device Google Glass (Google Inc; Mountain View, California USA) to communicate with an off-site physician disaster expert. The paramedic team triaged simulated disaster victims at the triennial drill of a commercial airport. The simulated victims had preassigned expected triage levels. The physician had an audio-video interface with the paramedic team and was able to observe the victims remotely. A control team of two paramedics performed disaster triage in the usual fashion. Both teams used the SMART Triage System (TSG Associates LLP; Halifax, England), which assigns patients into Red, Yellow, Green, and Black triage categories. The paramedics were video recorded, and their time required to triage was logged. It was determined whether the intervention team and the control team varied regarding accuracy of triage. Finally, the amount of time the intervention team needed to triage patients when telemedicine was used was compared to when that team did not use telemedicine.

Results

The two teams triaged the same 20 patients. There was no significant difference between the two groups in overall triage accuracy (85.7% for the intervention group vs 75.9% for the control group; P = .39). Two patients were triaged with telemedicine. For the intervention group, there was a significant difference in time to triage patients with telemedicine versus those without telemedicine (35.5 seconds; 95% CI, 72.5-143.5 vs 18.5 seconds; 95% CI, 13.4-23.6; P = .041).

Conclusion

There was no increase in triage accuracy when paramedics evaluating disaster victims used telemedicine, and telemedicine required more time than conventional triage. There are a number of obstacles to available technology that, if overcome, might improve the utility of telemedicine in disaster response.

Cicero MX , Walsh B , Solad Y , Whitfill T , Paesano G , Kim K , Baum CR , Cone DC . Do You See What I See? Insights from Using Google Glass for Disaster Telemedicine Triage. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2015;30(1):1-5 .

Copyright
Corresponding author
Correspondence: Mark X. Cicero, MD Yale University School of Medicine Department of Pediatrics Section of Pediatric Emergency Medicine New Haven, Connecticut USA E-mail mark.cicero@yale.edu
Footnotes
Hide All

Conflicts of interest: none

Footnotes
References
Hide All
1. Fendya D. When disaster strikes--care considerations for pediatric patients. J Trauma Nurs. 2006;13(4):161-165.
2. Bostick N, Subbarao I, Burkle FJ, Hsu E, Armstrong J, James J. Disaster triage systems for large-scale catastrophic events. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2008;2(Suppl 1):S35-39.
3. Frolic A, Kata A, Kraus P. Development of a critical care triage protocol for pandemic influenza: integrating ethics, evidence and effectiveness. Healthc Q. 2009;12(4):54-62.
4. Cowley RA, Myers RA, Gretes AJ. EMS response to mass casualties. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 1984;2(3):687-693.
5. Lowe C. Pediatric prehospital medicine in mass casualty incidents. J Trauma. 2009;67(2 Suppl):S161-167.
6. Cross KP, Cicero MX. Head-to-head comparison of disaster triage methods in pediatric, adult, and geriatric patients. Ann Emerg Med. 2013;61(6):668-676.e667.
7. Lerner E, Schwartz R, Coule P, et al. Mass casualty triage: an evaluation of the data and development of a proposed national guideline. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2008;2(Suppl 1):S25-34.
8. Zaslavsky O. Mass casualty triage: universal versus specific. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2009;3(2):71-72; author reply 72.
9. Kanter R. Strategies to improve pediatric disaster surge response: potential mortality reduction and tradeoffs. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(12):2837-2842.
10. Nager A, Khanna K. Emergency department surge: models and practical implications. J Trauma. 2009;67(2 Suppl):S96-99.
11. Kelen G, McCarthy M, Kraus C, et al. Creation of surge capacity by early discharge of hospitalized patients at low risk for untoward events. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2009;3(2 Suppl):S10-16.
12. McDermott B, Cobham V, Berry H, Stallman H. Vulnerability factors for disaster-induced child post-traumatic stress disorder: the case for low family resilience and previous mental illness. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2010;44(4):384-389.
13. Tsao J, Dobalian A, Wiens B, Gylys J, Evans G. Posttraumatic stress disorder in rural primary care: improving care for mental health following bioterrorism. J Rural Health. 2006;22(1):78-82.
14. Chung S, Shannon M. Reuniting children with their families during disasters: a proposed plan for greater success. Am J Disaster Med. 2007;2(3):113-117.
15. Pelaccia T, Delplancq H, Triby E, et al. Can teaching methods based on pattern recognition skill development optimize triage in mass-casualty incidents? Emerg Med J. 2009;26(12):899-902.
16. SALT mass casualty triage: concept endorsed by the American College of Emergency Physicians. American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma, American Trauma Society, National Association of EMS Physicians, National Disaster Life Support Education Consortium, and State and Territorial Injury Prevention Directors Association. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2008;2(4):245-246.
17. Sacco W, Navin D, Waddell RN, Fiedler K, Long W, Buckman RJ. A new resource-constrained triage method applied to victims of penetrating injury. J Trauma. 2007;63(2):316-325.
18. Cone DC, Serra J, Kurland L. Comparison of the SALT and SMART triage systems using a virtual reality simulator with paramedic students. Eur J Emerg Med. 2011;18(6):314-321.
19. Romig L. Pediatric triage. A system to JumpSTART your triage of young patients at MCIs. JEMS. 2002;27(7):52-58; 60-63.
20. Wallis LA, Carley S. Comparison of paediatric major incident primary triage tools. Emerg Med J. 2006;23(6):475-478.
21. Xiong W, Bair A, Sandrock C, Wang S, Siddiqui J, Hupert N. Implementing telemedicine in medical emergency response: concept of operation for a regional telemedicine hub. J Med Syst. 2012;36(3):1651-1660.
22. Muensterer OJ, Lacher M, Zoeller C, Bronstein M, Kübler J. Google Glass in pediatric surgery: an exploratory study. Int J Surg. 2014;12(4):281-289.
23. Parslow GR. Commentary: Google Glass: a head-up display to facilitate teaching and learning. Biochem Mol Biol Educ. 2014;42(1):91-92.
24. Latifi R, Tilley EH. Telemedicine for disaster management: can it transform chaos into an organized, structured care from the distance? Am J Disaster Med. 2014;9(1):25-37.
25. Dharmar M, Kuppermann N, Romano PS, et al. Telemedicine consultations and medication errors in rural emergency departments. Pediatrics. 2013;132(6):1090-1097.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Prehospital and Disaster Medicine
  • ISSN: 1049-023X
  • EISSN: 1945-1938
  • URL: /core/journals/prehospital-and-disaster-medicine
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 3
Total number of PDF views: 78 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 603 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 24th November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.