03/2014: The Surgical Robot: A Tool? A Toy? An Advance?
With advances in modern technologies, the fields of robotic engineering and medicine have meshed together to create exciting new methods of handling surgery. While previously, surgeons relied upon experience and gathered knowledge to perform their operations, the surgeries of today have progressed even to the realms of science fiction.
Although robotic surgery was originally developed for military use in the field, it was soon adopted in another fashion when medical specialists realized that it was more applicable as an on-site tool. The advancement of robotic medical systems can be traced from a first prostate exam, to intra-abdominal surgery with the da Vinci robotics systems, and finally colorectal surgeries to this day. Surgeons can now utilize robots to conduct precise operations, ensuring that surgeries go smoothly. With the lowered costs and such precision, the future of robotic medicinal treatments seems to be bright and beautiful. At least, that is what it would be seem to be. However, many ethical concerns must be addressed before the use of robotics becomes the norm for surgery.
An important concern is, of course, accountability when surgeries fail. As the “pilot” that guides the robot, does the surgeon bear the brunt of the blame, or is the robot somehow responsible? Of course, it might seem obvious that the surgeon would be to blame, as the machine is incapable of completing the task without the surgeon’s guidance. However, several cases of robot flaws have come to light regarding the capabilities of the robot. As the robots lack responses to tactile sensations and tensile feedback, robotic arms have been known to cause unintentional tissue damage during movement.
On another note, a fundamental question must be asked: is it ethical to employ the use of these robots? Issues have been documented after the FDA took a closer look at da Vinci robot operations, with an increasing amount of accidents, and even several deaths. Furthermore, it is suspected that many problems linked with robotic surgery are actually underreported, with the rapid adoption of such technologies and insufficient methods of analyzing complications.
The adopting of robots for surgery also has questionable effects on the skillset of surgeons. Of course, the robot is more precise and lacks shaking hands, but surgeons also gain valuable practical experience from manual cases. When complications arise, it is up to the surgeon to pull upon his repertoire of knowledge in resolving the situation; however, a primary shift towards robot use limits the experience level of practicing surgeons. If a reliance on these machines is widespread, the health industry may eventually train robot operators for medicinal practices rather than surgeons. Such a notion is worrying towards trust when it comes to the patient placing his/her life in the practitioner’s hands.
For all its ethical dilemmas, the field of robotic surgery is still in a tentative growth state with the potential to improve surgeries to a whole new level. It is important that we continue to develop this tool in the hopes of future benefits to society.