Background The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has led to rapid acceleration in the deployment of new digital technologies to improve both accessibility to and quality of care, and to protect staff. Mixed-reality (MR) technology is the latest iteration of telemedicine innovation; it is a logical next step in the move toward the provision of digitally supported clinical care and medical education. This technology has the potential to revolutionize care both during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective This pilot project sought to deploy the HoloLens2 MR device to support the delivery of remote care in COVID-19 hospital environments. Methods A prospective, observational, nested cohort evaluation of the HoloLens2 was undertaken across three distinct clinical clusters in a teaching hospital in the United Kingdom. Data pertaining to staff exposure to high-risk COVID-19 environments and personal protective equipment (PPE) use by clinical staff (N=28) were collected, and assessments of acceptability and feasibility were conducted. Results The deployment of the HoloLens2 led to a 51.5% reduction in time exposed to harm for staff looking after COVID-19 patients (3.32 vs 1.63 hours/day/staff member; P=.002), and an 83.1% reduction in the amount of PPE used (178 vs 30 items/round/day; P=.02). This represents 222.98 hours of reduced staff exposure to COVID-19, and 3100 fewer PPE items used each week across the three clusters evaluated. The majority of staff using the device agreed it was easy to set up and comfortable to wear, improved the quality of care and decision making, and led to better teamwork and communication. In total, 89.3% (25/28) of users felt that their clinical team was safer when using the HoloLens2. Conclusions New technologies have a role in minimizing exposure to nosocomial infection, optimizing the use of PPE, and enhancing aspects of care. Deploying such technologies at pace requires context-specific information security, infection control, user experience, and workflow integration to be addressed at the outset and led by clinical end-users. The deployment of new telemedicine technology must be supported with objective evidence for its safety and effectiveness to ensure maximum impact.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a minimally invasive therapeutic procedure to remove larger polyps or early non-metastatic lesions. It has long been used in Asia, but is now fast growing in popularity in the West. There are multiple challenges faced by ESD practitioners. While the practice of ESD in gastric lesions is relatively well established, the oesophagus with its narrow lumen and challenging workspace, and the colon with its tortuous course and folds are more challenging frontiers. The nature of performing a procedure endoscopically means that conventional methods offer no mechanism for providing counter-traction while performing dissection, impeding visibility and increasing the rate of complications. There are a multitude of tools available to those performing ESD for the different stages of the procedure. This article reviews the accessories currently used in regular ESD practice including the knives used to cut and dissect lesions, the cap and hood devices used to improve visibility and safety, injection fluids to lift the submucosal plane, haemostatic devices, generators, and finally, emerging traction apparatus. There is some evidence behind the use of these tools, however, ESD remains the domain of a small number of practitioners and the practice relies heavily on expert experience. Evolution of the ESD toolbox will make the procedure more accessible to more endoscopists, which in turn will drive the development of a more substantial evidence base to evaluate efficacy and safety of the multitude of tools.

Background Interventional endoluminal therapy is rapidly advancing as a minimally invasive surgical technique. The expanding remit of endoscopic therapy necessitates precision control. Eye tracking is an emerging technology which allows intuitive control of devices. This was a feasibility study to establish if a novel eye gaze-controlled endoscopic system could be used to intuitively control an endoscope. Methods An eye gaze-control system consisting of eye tracking glasses, specialist cameras and a joystick was used to control a robotically driven endoscope allowing steering, advancement, withdrawal and retroflexion. Eight experienced and eight non-endoscopists used both the eye gaze system and a conventional endoscope to identify ten targets in two simulated environments: a sphere and an upper gastrointestinal (UGI) model. Completion of tasks was timed. Subjective feedback was collected from each participant on task load (NASA Task Load Index) and acceptance of technology (Van der Laan scale). Results When using gaze-control endoscopy, non-endoscopists were significantly quicker when using gaze-control rather than conventional endoscopy (sphere task 3:54 ± 1:17 vs. 9:05 ± 5:40 min, p = 0.012, and UGI model task 1:59 ± 0:24 vs 3:45 ± 0:53 min, p < .001). Non-endoscopists reported significantly higher NASA-TLX workload total scores using conventional endoscopy versus gaze-control (80.6 ± 11.3 vs 22.5 ± 13.8, p < .001). Endoscopists reported significantly higher total NASA-TLX workload scores using gaze control versus conventional endoscopy (54.2 ± 16 vs 26.9 ± 15.3, p = 0.012). All subjects reported that the gaze-control had positive ‘usefulness’ and ‘satisfaction’ score of 0.56 ± 0.83 and 1.43 ± 0.51 respectively. Conclusions The novel eye gaze-control system was significantly quicker to use and subjectively lower in workload when used by non-endoscopists. Further work is needed to see if this would translate into a shallower learning curve to proficiency versus conventional endoscopy. The eye gaze-control system appears feasible as an intuitive endoscope control system. Hybrid gaze and hand control may prove a beneficial technology to evolving endoscopic platforms.

Background COVID-19 has had a catastrophic impact in terms of human lives lost. Medical education has also been impacted as appropriately stringent infection control policies precluded medical trainees from attending clinical teaching. Lecture-based education has been easily transferred to a digital platform, but bedside teaching has not. Objective This study aims to assess the feasibility of using a mixed reality (MR) headset to deliver remote bedside teaching. Methods Two MR sessions were led by senior doctors wearing the HoloLens headset. The trainers selected patients requiring their specialist input. The headset allowed bidirectional audiovisual communication between the trainer and trainee doctors. Trainee doctor conceptions of bedside teaching, impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on bedside teaching, and the MR sessions were evaluated using pre- and postround questionnaires, using Likert scales. Data related to clinician exposure to at-risk patients and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) were collected. Results Prequestionnaire respondents (n=24) strongly agreed that bedside teaching is key to educating clinicians (median 7, IQR 6-7). Postsession questionnaires showed that, overall, users subjectively agreed the MR session was helpful to their learning (median 6, IQR 5.25-7) and that it was worthwhile (median 6, IQR 5.25-7). Mixed reality versus in-person teaching led to a 79.5% reduction in cumulative clinician exposure time and 83.3% reduction in PPE use. Conclusions This study is proof of principle that HoloLens can be used effectively to deliver clinical bedside teaching. This novel format confers significant advantages in terms of minimizing exposure of trainees to COVID-19, reducing PPE use, enabling larger attendance, and delivering convenient and accessible real-time clinical training.