scholarly journals HE LIKED TO SAY THAT THIS LOVE WAS THE RESULT OF A CLINICAL ERROR

2020 ◽  
pp. xi-xiv
Keyword(s):  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 2315
Author(s):  
Yu-Cheng Lo ◽  
Guan-An Chen ◽  
Yin Chun Liu ◽  
Yuan-Hou Chen ◽  
Jui-Ting Hsu ◽  
...  

To improve the accuracy of bracket placement in vivo, a protocol and device were introduced, which consisted of operative procedures for accurate control, a computer-aided design, and an augmented reality–assisted bracket navigation system. The present study evaluated the accuracy of this protocol. Methods: Thirty-one incisor teeth were tested from four participators. The teeth were bonded by novice and expert orthodontists. Compared with the control group by Boone gauge and the experiment group by augmented reality-assisted bracket navigation system, our study used for brackets measurement. To evaluate the accuracy, deviations of positions for bracket placement were measured. Results: The augmented reality-assisted bracket navigation system and control group were used in the same 31 cases. The priority of bonding brackets between control group or experiment group was decided by tossing coins, and then the teeth were debonded and the other technique was used. The medium vertical (incisogingival) position deviation in the control and AR groups by the novice orthodontist was 0.90 ± 0.06 mm and 0.51 ± 0.24 mm, respectively (p < 0.05), and by the expert orthodontist was 0.40 ± 0.29 mm and 0.29 ± 0.08 mm, respectively (p < 0.05). No significant changes in the horizontal position deviation were noted regardless of the orthodontist experience or use of the augmented reality–assisted bracket navigation system. Conclusion: The augmented reality–assisted bracket navigation system increased the accuracy rate by the expert orthodontist in the incisogingival direction and helped the novice orthodontist guide the bracket position within an acceptable clinical error of approximately 0.5 mm.


2003 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Denison ◽  
J Rush Pierce

2006 ◽  
Vol 62 (7) ◽  
pp. 1605-1615 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roderick Aren Michael Iedema ◽  
Christine Jorm ◽  
Debbi Long ◽  
Jeffrey Braithwaite ◽  
Jo Travaglia ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e0255020
Author(s):  
Ji Eun Kim ◽  
Shin Young Ahn ◽  
Soo Ick Cho ◽  
Young Joo Kwon ◽  
SuHwan Shin ◽  
...  

Background Hemodialysis is a life-saving renal replacement treatment for patients with chronic kidney disease, but various complications occur during hemodialysis and associated procedures. This study was conducted to analyze the specific characteristics of hemodialysis-related complications and malpractice that have led to legal disputes. Methods Judgments from cases litigated between 1991 and 2019 due to complications related to hemodialysis or vascular access were analyzed using the database of the Korean Supreme Court Judgment System. Results Of 32 dialysis-related litigation cases, 14 cases were dismissed and malpractice was recognized in 18 cases. Among all cases and those in which malpractice was recognized, the most common clinical complication was associated with central venous catheter (CVC) insertion (25.0% and 42.9%, respectively). In 22 of 32 (68.8%) cases, complications occurred before or after (not during) dialysis, and performance error was the most common clinical error leading to legal disputes (58.3%). Complications resulted in death in 59.4% of cases, and CVC-related complications were associated with the largest proportion (63.2%) of deaths. Conclusions Hemodialysis was implicated in various medical disputes, and CVC-related complications were the most common and serious adverse events. Clinicians’ awareness of the incidence and severity of possible complications of hemodialysis procedures should be increased.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document