New Smart Glasses Allow Nurses To See Veins Through Skin

Lucas123 writes "Epson and Evena Medical today unveiled a new smart-glass technology that allows nurses to see 'through' a patient's skin to the vasculature beneath in order to make intravenous placement easier. The Eyes-On Glasses System is based on Epson's Moverio Smart Glasses Technology, an Android-based, see-through wearable display launched earlier this year that allows users to interact with apps and games. The glasses use near-infrared light to highlight deoxygenated hemoglobin in a patient's veins and capture the images with two stereoscopic cameras. The cameras then project the vein images onto the see-through glass screens. The glasses can store the images and video and transfer them wirelessly to a patient's electronic health record, and they also come with dual built-in speakers for video conferencing."

Comments

But can they see why

[Anonymous Coward]

Kids love cinemon toast crunch?

This is amazing

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't wait for the nurses "hey, I didn't know you were THAT happy to see me" jokes

Hey, if this means...

[gweilo8888]

...that they don't have to play "Go Fish" in my arm every time I get an IV in, I'm all for it, unintended consequences be damned.

Had to go into the hospital for the first time in ages the other day, and it took about five or six sticks -- including the kind where you can see them feeling around for anything once the needle's already in you -- before they hit the vein. And I'm skinny, as well, at least in the places where they stick me. Can't begin to imagine what it's like if your veins are invisible.

Re:Hey, if this means...

[Deadstick]

I don't know what the difference is, but I had an Air Force tech go five tries in each arm and give up, whereupon a doctor smirked at him, picked up the needle and took four tries.

But at the civilian blood shop I use today, it's first try every time.

Re:Hey, if this means...

[TheLink]

So you think it won't be in vein? ;)

Re:Hey, if this means...

[uglyduckling]

Actually this sort of tech is available now, it uses a compact video projector rather than glasses. It works well, although it does have a tendency to make even tiny veins appear viable for cannulation. http://www.christiedigital.com/en-us/projection-solutions/medical-innovations/pages/default.aspx I can see the potential of using glasses, the good thing about the projection version is that other people can also see what you're doing, which is helpful for a difficult procedure (e.g. PICC lines) where a couple of people might be involved. I could also imagine it reducing litigation potential compared to a single person looking through glasses.

Comics

[Master Moose]

I am sure that I saw an advert for this towards the back pages of my Fantastic Four comics circa 1982

Sounds familiar

[TheloniousToady]

Haven't we seen stories in this vein before?

(Or not.)

Re:Sounds familiar

[ColdWetDog]

And they make several commercial devices that do exactly the same. The one we have projects the image on the skin which would seemingly make it easier to use - less parallax issues. This tech has been around for a while. The glasses are the new kink, not sure if it's of any real use.

Re:Sounds familiar

[geekoid]

That's the best jab you got?

Re:Sounds familiar

[TheloniousToady]

"Insensitive prick"? Well, maybe...but that's none of your darn business. It'll happen to you too one day, just wait and see. Meanwhile, let's have a little respect for our elders...

Does the glasses pose any danger to the eyes ?

[Taco Cowboy]

From TFA:

The Eyes-On Glasses System is based on Epson's Moverio Smart Glasses Technology, an Android-based, see-through wearable display launched earlier this year that allows users to interact with apps and games.

That technology from Epson when applied to game, users do not put on those wearable display for hours and hours every single day, they only put them on when they play games.

On the other hand, nurses working in the hospitals may end up wearing the glasses which projects infrared lights many hours each days.

My question being --- Would prolonged exposure to infrared light poses any danger on the eyes of the wearer ?

Re:Does the glasses pose any danger to the eyes ?

[milkmage]

1) if they only need these things when inserting an IV, they only need to be worn when needed - nurses don't do IVs all day long. a single gaming session is going to last way longer than the 10 seconds it takes to stick a needle in your arm... and it's only for IVs not an injection (which a probably more common)

2) human eyes cannot see the infrared spectrum.. so what's the risk?

Re:Does the glasses pose any danger to the eyes ?

[quantumghost]

From TFA:

That technology from Epson when applied to game, users do not put on those wearable display for hours and hours every single day, they only put them on when they play games.

On the other hand, nurses working in the hospitals may end up wearing the glasses which projects infrared lights many hours each days.

My question being --- Would prolonged exposure to infrared light poses any danger on the eyes of the wearer ?

Unlikely. IR light has a longer wavelength and thus less energy than normal "visible" light, this is why we can't see in the infrared - the photons are not energetic enough to cause a conformal change in one of the double bonds in rhodopsin. This also partial explains why we can't see in the UV spectrum. The only variable will be the intensity of the light potentially causing thermal damage, but I doubt this would be that powerful enough for that. In addition, starting IVs is not the only thing nurses do....I'd guestimate that it is only about 5% of their daily work load on the general med-surg floors (where most patients have an IV already) and probably no more than 10-15% of the ED RNs.

Re:Does the glasses pose any danger to the eyes ?

[theshowmecanuck]

My impression is that the IR light is directed at the patient. It is probably mostly absorbed and converted to heat when it hits the skin, but the haemoglobin in veins close to the surface absorb differently from the surrounding tissue and makes the veins stand out. Whatever small amount of whatever wavelength it has transformed to after it has hit patients arm or other body part to be stuck, is reflected, recorded by cameras, and is projected on the lenses of the glasses. The way I read it, it is the projected images (like on a monitor or tv) that are viewed, likely as false colour or grey scale; not a full shot of IR pointed back at the wearer. So I would guess the answer is, not likely.

Re:Does the glasses pose any danger to the eyes ?

[Macgrrl]

Those sort of injections are usually intramuscular rather than intravenous - phlebotomists however stick needles in veins all day long.

Re:Does the glasses pose any danger to the eyes ?

[lxs]

So does visible light of similar intensity.
There is very little difference between near infrared and the visible spectrum. Just because our rods and cones don't react to the different wavelength doesn't make it any more dangerous. The exception to this rule are powerful near IR lasers that appear to the eye as faint red light sources and don't trigger pupil contraction and aversion reflexes.

Re:Does the glasses pose any danger to the eyes ?

[Vitriol Angst]

I'd have to say that this system is slightly less dangerous than a warm blanket, but slightly more dangerous than looking a person with the naked eye.

Near infrared radiation must be stopped!

Re:Does the glasses pose any danger to the eyes ?

[kermidge]

My God, someone here who can read and comprehend. Even the summary stated things well enough. Congratulations. For a while I was wondering if anyone here could follow simple prose.

So, also, the issue of long-term effects for phlebotomists would not apply either. The matter might be with proper focusing and composition of the image so as to avoid eyestrain. At my local hospital, from what I gathered, they typically might spend a couple of hours in the morning and another in the afternoon collecting blood.

At any rate, the device would be used in those instances where finding and using a good enough vein is problematic. Depending on the patient, and with enough time in hospital, finding such, whether for a draw or shunt, and being mindful of not damaging a given vein, can be troublesome. This gizmo seems like it might help.

(Not another) Raspbery Pi comment...

[hamster_nz]

Can't wait to see if this is possible to see this effect with the Raspberry Pi and a Pi NoIR camera, given that you can
use the material from inside a floppy disk as a visible light filter

This is hardly new

[AuraSeer]

We already have technology that does this. We have hand-held devices that shine near-infrared light through the skin and make the veins show up just fine.

They have significant problems, which this system shares. Most importantly, they show *all* veins, including all the ones which can't be cannulated because they are too small, too fragile, or too badly scarred. You have to palpate (feel) the vein to assess whether it's suitable, and if you can palpate it, you don't need to see it at all.

Also, they really only work at all on caucasian skin.

Further, this system is kind of ridiculously expensive. Even though the prices have dropped on commodity displays, microprocessors, 3G and wifi, and all those bells and whistles, it's still a complex piece of gear. We may as well pay for a bedside ultrasound which costs no more, is more precise, and is useful for a lot more than just IV starts.

Re:This is hardly new

[Anonymous Coward]

> Further, this system is kind of ridiculously expensive.

Part of that is because the FDA forces such extreme controls over who can buy them and own them. It cost us more than $10k of background checks, both for the hospital and several individuals that would have access to it, before we were allowed to purchase it. I don't know how much more the storage cabinet that weighs just over 500 pounds cost. Even after that, we can almost never use it because the FDA requires it be kept in that locked cabinet with very strict access controls and logging. Also, the local police objected to it vigorously. The device can make it easier for heroin users to find veins so in the view of the FDA and law enforcement, the device is drug paraphernalia and should be illegal. It's the same reason we were forced to put blue tinted lights in the bathrooms of the hospital. By not doing so they claimed we were encouraging illegal drug use. Somehow the cops think we're criminals and deserve to be put in jail if we use normal fluorescent lights. Cop logic makes no sense.

Re:This is hardly new

[uglyduckling]

I disagree. Certainly in paediatrics transilluminators work on all skin colours. To my knowledge, they don't use 'near-infrared' but use visible light, usually from red LEDs. This technology does use infra-red, and again skin pigmentation shouldn't matter. The projection-based devices I've used (e.g. Vein Viewer) worked fine on black african and asian skin pigments.

Re:Brought to you by

[quantumghost]

This is not quite new....I've seen IR based devices over 8 years ago, I first saw this tech in 2005 and it was pretty mature at the time. I can't recall which company it was, but a quick google serarch shows this company has been doing something similar for 4 years. The article is grabbing headlines because they packaged it into a eye-glass format.

Killer robots

[PPH]

With enhanced vision to pick out a suitably lethal spot. I'm certain I've seen this hinted at in numerous movies.

Re:technology shouldn't replace expertise

[green1]

And as an EMT, (a profession that generally starts a lot more IVs) I would love to have this tech available. It's not an either or situation. seeing the veins is a great first step to evaluating which one to use. You don't cannulate the first vein you see, you still have to evaluate the suitability of each one, but being able to see them would be a great start. Limiting yourself to palpation based on anatomy can often miss good veins that are a little too deep or not quite where you expect them (not every person has identical vein locations) this wouldn't be needed for all IV starts. But on some of the more difficult ones this could really help a lot.

Re:technology shouldn't replace expertise

[uglyduckling]

Sound like you've never worked in paediatrics. Palpation is almost useless for children under 8, just go for what you can see, transilluminate or in this case pick up with infra-red.