Humans Overthrow Robot Anesthesiologists Replacements

[HardOCP News]

The company blames poor sales for shutting down the Skynet robotic anesthesiologist program but I like to think that it was the human resistance that fought back against the machines. What? You know I'm right.

The device handled one of the most common and yet risky hospital procedures: Putting someone to sleep so they don’t feel discomfort or pain, yet not so asleep that they don’t wake up. The machine was seen as the leading lip of an automation wave transforming hospitals. But Johnson & Johnson recently announced it was pulling the plug on Sedasys because of poor sales.

 

[sfsuphysics]

And sedation with the Sedasys machine cost $150 to $200 for each procedure, compared to $2,000 for an anesthesiologist, one of healthcare’s best-paid specialties.

Riiiiight. $2000 for an anesthesiologist isn't because that's what it cost the hospital, even though they can make pretty damn good salaries, it's the price that's charged to the patient because they need to make up for the money they might be losing at any other step in the entire hospital (not just the patient's stay). This is why it used to cost $20 to get a tiny micro-box of tissues that are great for doing finishing sanding work on fine carpentry. Plus the $200 per use for the machine is probably based on the cost of the machine divided by the estimated life of the machine, and I can't imagine that J&J would put that kind of work into a machine that would really be that inexpensive, plus the hospital would still charge you (or whatever health insurance provider you have) $2k per use.

That said, I still think the idea of potentially bringing someone to the edge of death/coma might be better for a human who can look for potential hiccups that might occur, where as the logic of this machine is fairly black and white.

 

[Stiler]

Riiiiight. $2000 for an anesthesiologist isn't because that's what it cost the hospital, even though they can make pretty damn good salaries, it's the price that's charged to the patient because they need to make up for the money they might be losing at any other step in the entire hospital (not just the patient's stay). This is why it used to cost $20 to get a tiny micro-box of tissues that are great for doing finishing sanding work on fine carpentry. Plus the $200 per use for the machine is probably based on the cost of the machine divided by the estimated life of the machine, and I can't imagine that J&J would put that kind of work into a machine that would really be that inexpensive, plus the hospital would still charge you (or whatever health insurance provider you have) $2k per use.

That said, I still think the idea of potentially bringing someone to the edge of death/coma might be better for a human who can look for potential hiccups that might occur, where as the logic of this machine is fairly black and white.

Machines are far less prone to make "accidents" or to lose focus of what they are meant to be doing outside of programming errors or such things. On top of being able to know exactly the information they need in a split second vs a human who has to learn things and not forget them.

I'd trust this machine that can keep track of every-single thing it needs to on a faster level than any human could.

Would you trust a calculator to know more answers to math questions quicker than you would some avg Joe straight out of high school off the top of his head?

 

[dangerouseddy]

I think id take a well trained anesthesiologist over a machine everyday, having sat in on one questioning my dad about his medical history and what medication he takes i don't think id trust a machine to be able to cope with every contingency.

 

[nutzo]

I think id take a well trained anesthesiologist over a machine everyday, having sat in on one questioning my dad about his medical history and what medication he takes i don't think id trust a machine to be able to cope with every contingency.

And that's part of the problem.
The machine might be able to handle administering the anesthesia and monitor vitals, but you still need a human to prep everything, check medical history, and to be standing by just in case something goes wrong.

 

[magoo]

The machine cant intubate the patient, cant place a spinal anesthetic, cant perform nerve blocks, simply cannot perform all the tasks the human can.
You'd still need someone to be there to control the recovery and communicate with the surgeon during the surgery to make adjustment or administer blood or other medicines.
Its just not a good use of technology.

 

[Uvaman2]

The machine cant intubate the patient, cant place a spinal anesthetic, cant perform nerve blocks, simply cannot perform all the tasks the human can.
You'd still need someone to be there to control the recovery and communicate with the surgeon during the surgery to make adjustment or administer blood or other medicines.
Its just not a good use of technology.

I agree .... Cant see the patient overall, and see bleeding out (before blood pressure starts crashing) , cant start a transfusion... Cant, cant cant... This is nonsense.

 

[Quix]

Riiiiight. $2000 for an anesthesiologist isn't because that's what it cost the hospital, even though they can make pretty damn good salaries, it's the price that's charged to the patient because they need to make up for the money they might be losing at any other step in the entire hospital (not just the patient's stay). This is why it used to cost $20 to get a tiny micro-box of tissues that are great for doing finishing sanding work on fine carpentry.

Only in America, other countries seem to be able to keep their healthcare costs in line.

 

[Spidey329]

Only in America, other countries seem to be able to keep their healthcare costs in line.

Because other countries realized that there's a difference between a healthy profit and outright gouging of another industry (insurance). I'm all for profit caps in the healthcare industry simply because life or death is too big of a carrot for greed exploitation.

 

[nutzo]

Only in America, other countries seem to be able to keep their healthcare costs in line.

Of course, it's much cheaper to let people die while they are on a waiting list, than to have all the equipment available to treat them quickly.

 

[magoo]

Let me see.......

I think I'll pay for the anesthesiologist that has 30 years of experience and is boarded versus the machine that needs a software update, or a new battery, or a memory stick fries during my surgery, or the cleaning lady trips over the electrical cord, or wait....the
nurse in the room spills her coffee on the machine.......

Gee I don't know......