» Articles » PMID: 27517092

Peer Review and Surgical Innovation: Robotic Surgery and Its Hurdles

Overview
Journal Am J Robot Surg
Date 2016 Aug 13
PMID 27517092
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The peer review processes as outlined in the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA) is meant ensure quality standard of care through a self-policing mechanism by the medical community. This process grants immunity for people filing a peer review, which is meant to protect whistleblowers. However, it also creates a loophole that can be used maliciously to hinder competition. This is accentuated when surgeons are integrating new technologies, such as robotic surgery, into their practice. With more than 2000 da Vinci robots in use and more than 300 new units being shipped each year, robotic surgery has become a mainstay in the surgical field. The applications for robots continue to expand as surgeons discover their expanding capability. We need a better peer review process. That ensures the peer review is void of competitive bias. Peer reviewers need to be familiar with the procedure and the technology. The current process could stymie innovation in the name of competition.

Citing Articles

Safety with Innovation in Colon and Rectal Robotic Surgery.

Keller D, Jenkins C Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2021; 34(5):273-279.

PMID: 34504400 PMC: 8416332. DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1726352.


Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Radiation Oncology.

Weidlich V, Weidlich G Cureus. 2018; 10(4):e2475.

PMID: 29904616 PMC: 5999390. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.2475.


Advances in endoscopic balloon therapy for weight loss and its limitations.

Vyas D, Deshpande K, Pandya Y World J Gastroenterol. 2017; 23(44):7813-7817.

PMID: 29209122 PMC: 5703910. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i44.7813.

References
1.
Epstein A, Groeneveld P, Harhay M, Yang F, Polsky D . Impact of minimally invasive surgery on medical spending and employee absenteeism. JAMA Surg. 2013; 148(7):641-7. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.131. View

2.
Hoekstra A, Jairam-Thodla A, Rademaker A, Singh D, Buttin B, Lurain J . The impact of robotics on practice management of endometrial cancer: transitioning from traditional surgery. Int J Med Robot. 2009; 5(4):392-7. DOI: 10.1002/rcs.268. View

3.
Patel A, Patel M, Lytle N, Toro J, Medbery R, Bluestein S . Can we become better robot surgeons through simulator practice?. Surg Endosc. 2013; 28(3):847-53. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-013-3231-x. View

4.
Schatlo B, Martinez R, Alaid A, von Eckardstein K, Akhavan-Sigari R, Hahn A . Unskilled unawareness and the learning curve in robotic spine surgery. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2015; 157(10):1819-23. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-015-2535-0. View

5.
Livingston E, Harwell J . Peer review. Am J Surg. 2001; 182(2):103-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9610(01)00679-1. View