Google Glass lets you send messages without typing. It lets others see things in your eyes. But how practical can it be?
The release of Glass made the world impressed when it could even do translations off signages. However, people were less impressed when they saw the hefty $1,500 price tag but in return, it gave the buyer an entire new world. This especially shown in the medical arena.
In May, Dr Shafi Ahmad, along with Dr Hemant Kocher made history when they did a live stream from UK of their procedure where they removed cancerous tissue from their 78 year old patient’s liver and bowel. This was seen by 13,000 students around the world who had the chance to ask Ahmad questions while he assisted Kocher on the procedure. Ahmad replied questions from students as they appeared on the right side of the glass. People wondered if the questions obstructed his line of sight but he clarified that there were no issues while working on the operation.
From the report posted by Telegraph UK, subsequent online questionnaires that the students took showed that 90% of the students who saw the live stream wanted this form of learning as part of their course curriculum.
However, from the other end of the globe there seems to have objections. Alexandra Pelletier, a technology innovation program manager in Boston’s Children Hospital, said that doctors experimenting with the Google Glass in America may be subjected to violating the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The Act has laid out requirements on the protection of all information with regards to the patients and with the use of Google Glass, it will be an act of treading on thin ice. That is because Google Glass’s ability of accessing recorded information online may infringe the HIPAA, which is subjective to the recipient of the information.
At the end of the day, will it help to train more doctors for the price of revealing confidential information? Or will the patient end up losing another organ while the doctor is teaching the world?