Background
Augmented reality (AR) has the potential to be utilized in various fields. Nursing fulfils the requirements of smart glass use cases, and technology may be one method of supporting nurses that face challenges such as demographic change. The development of AR to assist in nursing is now feasible. Attempts to develop applications have been made, but there has not been an overview regarding the existing research.
Objective
The aim of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the current research regarding AR in nursing to identify possible research gaps. This led to the following research question: “To date, what research has been performed regarding the use of AR in nursing?”. A focus has been placed on the topics involving cases, evaluations, and devices used.
Methods
A scoping review was carried out with the methodological steps outlined by Arksey and O’Malley (2005) and further enhanced by Levac et al. (2010). A broad range of keywords were used systematically in eight databases including PubMed, Web of Science and ACM to search for topics in nursing.
Results
The search led to 23 publications that were included in the final analysis. The majority of the identified publications describe pilot studies. The methods used for identifying use cases and evaluating applications differ among the included studies. Furthermore, the devices used vary from study to study and may include smart glasses, tablets, and smart watches, among others. Previous studies predominantly evaluated the use of smart glasses. In addition, evaluations did not take framing conditions into account. Reviewed publications that evaluated the use of AR in nursing also identified technical challenges associated with AR.
Conclusions
These results show that the use of AR in nursing may have positive implications. While current studies focus on evaluating prototypes, future studies should focus on performing long-term evaluations to take framing conditions and the long-term consequences of AR into consideration. Our findings are important and informative for nurses and technicians who are involved in the development of new technologies. They can use our findings to reflect on their own design of case identification, requirements for elicitation and evaluation.
Personal contextual factors play an essential part in the ICF model in relation to patient-centred care. It is generally assumed that their classification must refer to the country-specific social and cultural setting and its particular linguistic terms. Therefore personal factors are not classified as yet by the WHO for general use. In Germany in 2006 a group of experts working on the medical advisory board of statutory health insurance published a proposal for a systematic classification of relevant personal factors to describe the background of an individual's life and living. This classification was now further analysed and thoroughly revised by a more comprehensive group of German specialists working in different health care insurances and institutions, authorised by the German Society for Social Medicine and Prevention (DGSMP), supported by German-speaking Swiss ICF specialists. This classification is published as work in progress intending to broaden and prepare the process of discussion for a consensus conference to be held in Germany in 2011.
Twenty-five patients undergoing simultaneous, bilateral total knee arthroplasty (TKA) were randomized to receive skin closure with Zip device on one knee and staples on the other. Patients' pain and scar appearance were rated from 0 (best) to 10 (worst). Knee arc of motion was measured by a physical therapist. At 2 weeks postoperatively, pain scores were significantly better with the Zip device during device wear (p = 0.03) and during device removal (p = 0.003); arc of motion was significantly better with the Zip device (p = 0.002). At 8 weeks of follow-up, scar appearance was significantly better in the Zip device knee as rated by the patients (1.3 vs. 2.6, p = 0.04), the surgeon (1.9 vs. 3.3, p = 0.0006), and three independent plastic surgeons (3.7 vs. 4.8, p < 0.001). Results of this randomized controlled trial show that skin closure with the Zip device resulted in less pain and better scar appearance and knee arc of motion than with staples.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.