Robot Nurses To Cut Health Care Costs
Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: Robot, Nurses, Cut, Healthcare, Costs | Themes: IFA consumer electronics show, Business
A roboticist thinks robot nurses are on the horizon.
Who hasn't fantasized about in-house robots cleaning the floors, preparing dinner, or washing our backs in a nice warm bubble bath? Although robots are replacing humans in various industries, Colin Angle, a roboticist and CEO of iRobot, has a vision of robots cutting down the costs of health care. Earlier today at IFA in Berlin, Angle made his vision known to CNET during the convention, saying that robotic "nurses" in a person's home could reduce the $2.2 trillion spent on health care every year.
His vision includes robots caring for elderly people who insist on living at home, or sick patients that don't require surgery. What his vision doesn't include is robots that walk and talk like C-3PO or Ash (from Alien), but rather machine-like devices similar to the Roomba and Scooba household robots that he helped design.
"Instead of patients with chronic illnesses constantly going to a hospital for even minor treatments and checkups, a telepresence device could act as a proxy for the doctor to check in on them," reports CNET based on an example provided by Angle. "The robot could examine, diagnose, and make sure a prescription is administered on the right schedule. The patient, in other words, wouldn't have to set foot in a hospital unless he or she needs care that is only available there."
Of course, currently, it's extremely difficult to finance a house let alone a "nurse" robot. Without insurance flipping most of the bill, elderly consumers won't be able to afford such devices, especially those living on social security, disability or retirement. But Angle seems to think there's a market, saying that consumers spent between $2,000 and $3,000 each on health-related equipment, and the number will jump over 7 million within the next three years.
-
Previous News Article
Microsoft Banning Halo: ODST... -
Next News Article
Pirate Bay Appeal Set for November
I saw these in action (by video). For ppl who need lifting this could be better than traditional hoists, but it's really not taking over anything like the role of a qualified nurse. I wonder if it would be cost-effective compared to hiring a couple of care-assistants on minimum wage.
If they talk like C3P0 that would be cool...
stupid. I'm studying for nurse and I wouln't like to be "replaced" by a robot. It's just humiliating!
yep i agree ^^ it'll cut costs... and jobs.
Somethings are better performed by Humans. I suspect an elderly person who requires care would also enjoy the Human interaction of a Nurse apposed to a machine.
I also totally agree that it'll cut costs and jobs.. BUT also in the same sense, where I live, nurses tend to be lazy. Very unfortunate. technically I still would rather have a real living being. LOL besides, anything that has to do with technology will either fail or freeze at some point in time. It'd suck if the robot froze at a critical time.
I'd rather have lazy nurse than a robot nurse that becomes self-aware and picks up a weapon.
This is beyond stupid. Robotic "nurse"? First of all, nurses don't diagnose. Second of all, what will this thing actually do? Blood tests? Urine tests? Not only is this not practical (would you let a robot stick you in the arm?), but it wouldn't be more cost effective to have tens of thousands of urine/serum analyzing stations in people's homes. And what do they mean by "examine"? Certainly there wouldn't be any imaging. This thing wouldn't be changing dressings. I really would like to know what this thing could actually do. Monitor BP in hypertensive patients? Okay there's one idea that has a relative amount of logistics...but do you need an effing robot to do that? No.
assuming they dont set a pricetag on these things that only Bill Gates can afford -- its doable.
The time savings alone can be worth paying $3-5k for something like this.
sure it will cut some jobs. but it will also CREATE jobs as service techs for these things..
It's a great idea until the robot realizes you would make a great battery.
Looks good for simple tasks like answering the door and reaching for the TV remote, but would it call 911 if you fell or perform CPR if you stop breathing?
My opinion. It will not happen:
1 - Real nurses have personality that cannot be duplicated by AI. Somehow, I don't see "Good morning, Dave" anywhere close to reality.
2 - HUGE legal liability here. If the patient that this nurse is tending becomes injured in any way while being treated by this hardware... The company/hospital that installs one of these things will need to absolve itself of any responsibility instantly after deploying one of these.
3 - Somehow I do not see JHACO approving of the use of something like this. -At least in the U.S.
Looks good for simple tasks like answering the door and reaching for the TV remote, but would it call 911 if you fell or perform CPR if you stop breathing?
Agreed...but household tasks aren't the realm of a nurse. That sounds like hospice, which would be even less approachable by a robot - a majority of the care provided by hospice is intended to be psychological in nature. Nor do hospice workers diagnose or cure anything. Let's just stick with Life Alert.
yep i agree ^^ it'll cut costs... and jobs.
yep if soemthgin liek this was implemented you coudl kiss our already shakey economy's ass goodbye
I'd rather have lazy nurse than a robot nurse that becomes self-aware and picks up a weapon.
You wtch waaaaaay to much sci-fi dude , seriously get a brain , or alife LOL
Cut jobs? Isn't there a shortage of nurses already?
Furthermore, I don't think is supposed to be a full-fledged "Nurse Robot" so much as an appliance that might, say, roll over to your bed and remind you to take these pills at the right time. Maybe have videophone to on-call physicians or live nurses who can help with emergencies or check up on the patient from time to time.
^^^ But, again, do you need a massive, expensive robot for those tasks? They could easily be fulfilled by a small, well designed box that sits in, say, your bathroom.
I am still waiting for my OUT OF MY HOUSE robot... it's shouldn't be hard to design, it was in Robocop 1.
... the ultimate job outsource... the robots gonna take even the jobs from Chinese...
My physician has been hiring robotic nurses for years now.
Oh look, the government has found another way to waste taxpayer money.
how is the CEO of iRobot developing these products mean that the government is wasting taxpayers' money? If they want to put money into R&D for these products, it has nothing to do with the government.
How is the government wasting taxpayer money if the company iRobot decides to research these products? That doesn't make any sense? Are you sure you meant to say that?
This would probably be ideal with tasks such as reminding them with their medication and checking their vital signs. There are just a lot of instances where a person has a heart attack, or some similar condition just to be discovered dead days later.
We don't need to lose any more jobs to the Chinese or a robot with "tech support" outsourced to a guy sitting in Pakistan!
Im with the 'what would they do' poster.
There is NO practical application with our current level of technology.
Assuming they could have human level intelligence with the diagnosis of many different medical machines, and could be massed produced cheaply....ok.....or in other words is not going to happen with current technology.
With our level of robotics technology....it cant do much for you. Or rather there already exists much cheaper mass produced solutions now for anything it could do...
Answer a door for you? Ever hear of intercom, and electronic remote door releases...these are much cheaper then a robot.
Heart monitoring etc, there are sensors for this, hook it up to wifi with remote call for assistance....already exist, dont need a robot.
I cant argue with the dream, it sounds neat, your personal medical robot.....but i cant ignore reality, we CANT make that with current technology. We need a massive leap in AI to be able to do that.
We cant even teach a robot to see....we can have them measure their surroundings, and then extrapolate a 3d model based on the measurements, and then try to figure out what each blob is etc. Measuring is good, you can get information that humans simply dont have, but you need to combine it with the act of 'seeing'. The simple act of looking at a picture and seeing is far beyond our level of AI.
If we cant teach a robot to see, how do we teach it to be a effective nurse at a reasonable cost.
great... not only are illigal immigrants taking our jobs but now robots. *sigh*
и
great... not only are illigal immigrants taking our jobs but now robots. *sigh*
Are you a nurse?
No.... Healthcare isn't expensive because there are a bunch of greedy healthcare executives gouging the consumer for their shareholder's benefit because they know that people must have healthcare. No sir, healthcare is expensive because we don't have robots doing it.
/sarcasm
Our founding fathers(not being pussies like us), would've started shooting long before now... We are all willing to slog through a terrible humanitarian crisis by continually voting our crooked 2 party system in/out of office, and every time it doesn't get fixed, we assume it's because we didn't vote for "the other guy". If it's only a 2-party system, then one of them must be right???
OTOH, Anybody who tries to rationalize that it's somehow right and fair for a doctor to charge $800 for a vasectomy, a 15 minute proceduring involving equipment invented hundreds of years ago, is just an idiot, plain and simple. They could do it for $100 and still profit, but since they've all agreed to charge exorbitant amounts, so we are effectively price-gouged...
No.... Healthcare isn't expensive because there are a bunch of greedy healthcare executives gouging the consumer for their shareholder's benefit because they know that people must have healthcare. No sir, healthcare is expensive because we don't have robots doing it./sarcasmOur founding fathers(not being pussies like us), would've started shooting long before now... We are all willing to slog through a terrible humanitarian crisis by continually voting our crooked 2 party system in/out of office, and every time it doesn't get fixed, we assume it's because we didn't vote for "the other guy". If it's only a 2-party system, then one of them must be right??? OTOH, Anybody who tries to rationalize that it's somehow right and fair for a doctor to charge $800 for a vasectomy, a 15 minute proceduring involving equipment invented hundreds of years ago, is just an idiot, plain and simple. They could do it for $100 and still profit, but since they've all agreed to charge exorbitant amounts, so we are effectively price-gouged...
I was under the impression that Doctors were paid that way for two reasons, one if they weren't, they'd be in debt from medical school (300K+-) for the rest of their god forsaken lives. And two what they're doing is incredibly stressful and they have your penis (in this case) at stake, just like a tugboat captain makes a large amount of money because there's a lot on his shoulders. If that makes any sense.
иAre you a nurse?
it was a joke, you know "haha thats funny"
Humans are, by nature, flawed. Robots, being built by humans, will be flawed too, but probably a lot less than humans.
I'd rather have a robot. They'd be more predictable, and I wouldn't have to listen to their stupidity all day. Plus, they wouldn't resent actually doing anything, and wouldn't raid the fridge, except to get you something.
Health care costs are out of control, and all the people that are scared it would cost jobs are probably nurses, or thinking about being one. Here's the reality though, it would create jobs, just not the jobs you gals want. Health care costs are assumed, at least partially, by companies that hire people, and when you lower them, you lower costs. That would allow them to either hire more people, or lower costs for their services.
I don't want to be in a situation where I have to subsidize nurses if they aren't needed. Health care is out of control, so anything that helps should be considered. I'm not sure these devices are the answer though, but even if they work in limited situations, it is something. And while you might not like a mechanical beast instead of a smelly, obnoxious, chatterbox human, there are some that do. Why would you object to someone having that choice, if it really works? I'm not convinced this thing will though; I'm still convinced computers are high speed idiots. But maybe for limited situations. And from there, maybe they can improve it to take on new situations.
With robots working as nurses the term blue screen of death will take on a whole new meaning