Developing Robots for the ER: What Do You Think?

Did pilots lose their jobs when auto-pilot was developed?

No. Surgeons aren't losing their jobs since robo-surgery was developed, and nurses won't lose theirs either.

And cashiers did not lose ALL of their jobs when self checkouts were installed but ONE cashier monitors 6 checkout lines. What happened to the other 5 jobs ? Do we have the same number of bank tellers post-ATM ? Granted nursing is more complex but I can see job cuts. The ER clerk will probably be the first to go from what I'm reading. The triage nurse will be next with 1 triage nurse monitoring and "backing up" 4 bots.

Triage is a lot more subtle than an automated checklist.

This isn't really going to fly. Why not put this money into hiring a couple of more nurses to relieve "the strain on overburdened emergency room staff"

Saw that the other day. My thoughts were:

1) this technology is a looooooooo(deep breath)oooooooong way from deployment.

2) as casi said, it would be cheaper to pay for a few more nurses. There's no way this is gping to be cheap.

3) how many times in triage has "nothing" turned out to be "something" and vice-versa. Gonna take some serious programming.

jmho

the robot cannot "think". That is what nurses get paid to do. If there are non-thinking tasks out there it might relieve the nurse from certain duties. We had a robot where I used to work that delievered medications and mail. You had to have a key to open his "belly" to retrieve the items. I don't know why a robot could not take a pillow to someone or pick up trays, etc.

Has anyone seen the movie "Idiocracy"? There is a part where the character goes to the hospital and tells someone his symptoms and basically the guy just pushes a button the closes resembles the complaint (i.e. stomach ache-button with guy holding stomach...) This is totally what came to mind while reading this!

I agree with other posters that this technology is waaaaaay off, and even when it comes around I doubt it will catch on because there are so many little nuances to triage-that's why most ER's don't let new grads triage right off the bat. There is more to it than checking the appropriate box.

That being said, even if this technology somehow worked nurses would still have jobs in the ER. This is not something that will completely replace the ER nurse-just take one out of triage and (hopefully) put another working on patients being seen. I'd like to see a robot that can get an IV in a dehydrated IV drug user going through withdrawl. The day that happens I may fear for my job a bit-until then I'm not worried. :)

The article is about robot assistants not replacing nurses.

I for one would prefer a robot actually dedicated to a task

rather than seeing the do-nothing techs for hire sit around

and complain about having to actually DO their jobs.

Since many departments around the hospital have taken away

our autonomy and dumb-ed us down I have no problem with a

robot fetching my meds and fluids from pharmacy, my blood from

lab, or a foley leg-bag from supply. The techs from the last 3 ERs

I've worked in certainly haven't... 25.00/hr to sit around and complain.

...bring on the robots.

Well either way someone has to be there to operate the robots, do maintenance on the robots, and monitor the patients; so there are some jobs to be made. But as far as nurses go, I do not foresee it affecting RN's since they are needed at the bedside but I do see it affecting LPN and below.

Really, I fear the day when this does become a reality. I know, I know, we are all good nurses and have common sense, right? (haha) But I would fear that this "invention" could dumb down the hospital personnel. I mean, 20 years ago the local cafe had an old, non-working cash register and that was ok. The waitress/cashier knew how to count change. Nowadays, they do what the register tells them to. Havent you noticed? And, by gosh, give them a penny to make up the $4.46 after they have already rung in the $5.00 and they are lost! It seems the invention of such technology has forced them to know "what the machine tells me to do." This being the case, what will happen with hospital personnel when the robot tells them that the guy with chest pain has a normal b/p? Will that worker/nurse/etc just figure the guy is ok cuz the robot says his vitals are normal while he sits there having an MI?

I don't know. We like to think that we are all competent nurses, but don't we all know a nurse that is questionable? It's these questionable nurses (maybe I'm one of them, lol) that I would worry about not being able to look at a patient and decide for themselves that the patient needs to be seen despite what the robot is telling them to do.

Huh. I wish. Let's the "customers: cuss and spit at a robot for a change.

I don't think the world of Isaac Asimov is about to burst upon us; there's still no such thing as Artificial Intelligence, and given the amount of stuff a computer can foul up, there's not much human intelligence either. Every time I hear someone telling me "it's a computer mistake" I remind the idiot that computers can only do what humans tell them to do...

I can imagine the advertising blurbs: "Microsoft School of Nursing! Prepare for your NCLEX exam in 45.9 Nanoseconds!"