The robot is here to draw your blood

A company has produced prototype robots that can draw blood from human arms. Here is a 48 second video showing one of them in action.



Using an infrared camera, the robot identifies a suitable vein and accesses the vein with ultrasound guidance.

A second video, not embedded in this post, explains that the robot is about 83% successful at drawing blood which compares favorably to the success rate of experienced human phlebotomists. The robots inventor hopes to refine the procedure to get the success rate up to 90%.

It also says that there are 9 billion blood draws per year in the United States suggesting that a market is certainly there.

The second video also mentions the discomfort patients experience when a phlebotomist misses or damages the vein.

However, the robot needs quite a bit of help from a human phlebotomist both before and after the actual blood draw takes place.

The robot cant apply a tourniquet, cant wipe the skin with alcohol, can’t take the cover off the needle, once the vein is accessed cant actually remove the blood from the vein with a syringe, cant take off the tourniquet [the human assistant didn’t do it correctly either*], can’t apply pressure to the puncture site, cant put a Band-Aid on the skin, and can’t safely dispose of the needle.

It’s not clear what the robot would do if a patient flinches or withdraws his arm. Patients have been known to do those things.

For the foreseeable future, the robot would have to be accompanied by a human. So whatever the cost of the robot, personnel would not be eliminated.

Its a clever idea, but I don’t think a robot will be drawing your blood any time soon. ________________________________________________________
*One must undo the tourniquet before taking the needle out of the arm or the back-pressure will cause bleeding and/or a hematoma

Read More..

Narcotic addicts can sue doctors and pharmacies for enabling them

In a 3-2 decision, the Supreme Court of West Virginia ruled that narcotic addicts may sue pharmacies and physicians for facilitating their addictions.

A suit was brought on behalf of 29 pain center patients who had been treated with narcotics for various injuries and became addicted. One article quoted the Chief Justices explanation: "A plaintiff’s wrongful or immoral conduct does not prohibit them from seeking damages as the result of the actions of others."

The court recognized that most of the plaintiffs "admitted their abuse of controlled substances occurred before they sought help "at the pain clinic.

Another story said, "The justices paved the way for people to claim damages for allegedly causing or contributing to their addictions of controlled substances—even if they broke the law by doctor shopping."

In a dissenting opinion, one justice wrote that the decision “requires hardworking West Virginians to immerse themselves in the sordid details of the parties’ enterprise in an attempt to determine who is the least culpable—a drug addict or his dealer.”

In response to the ruling, the West Virginia Medical Association issued a statement: "It may cause some physicians to curb or stop treating pain altogether for fear of retribution should treatment lead to patient addiction and/or criminal behavior. It may create additional barriers for patients seeking treatment for legitimate chronic pain due to reduced access to physicians. It would allow criminals to potentially profit for their wrongful conduct by taking doctors and pharmacists to court."

A post on the American Pharmacists Association website explained that pharmacists were included in the ruling "because they were aware of the pill mill activities of the medical providers. The plaintiffs said these pharmacies refilled the controlled substances too early, refilled them for excessive periods of time, filled contraindicated controlled substances, and filled synergistic controlled substances."

One newspaper summarized the public reaction to the ruling in an editorial stating, "Those who are illegally abusing prescription narcotics should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The same goes for medical professionals who are found guilty of committing a criminal act. But telling a drug addict or someone who is illegally abusing prescription narcotics that it is OK to go to court and file what could very well be a frivolous lawsuit is both baffling and shameful. This ruling by the Supreme Court justices is a clear back eye for West Virginia. And it does nothing to help West Virginia’s rampant drug problem."

As I wrote last year, I think the prescription drug abuse epidemic all stems from a 15-year campaign that declared pain is the fifth vital sign—a concept which is both untrue and as we have come to learn, harmful.

I agree with the WVMA. If I were practicing in West Virginia, I would be very reluctant to prescribe narcotic pain medication to any patient.

What do you think?

Read More..