Abstract
Introduction: Telerobotic ultrasound has emerged as a promising technology in medicine, especially in settings with limited medical access or a lack of specialized personnel. However, there are very few studies evaluating its usefulness in real-world clinical practice. Objective: This study evaluates the usefulness of abdominopelvic telerobotic ultrasound in a real-world practice setting. Methods: A prospective study was performed in a cohort of adult patients who underwent abdominal ultrasound in a remote secondary hospital for suspected abdominal or pelvic pathology. Examinations were performed by an on-site technician and a remote abdominal radiologist. Satisfaction of patients and explorers, scan times, quality of visualization of anatomical structures, and ultrasound findings were measured and compared with standard ultrasound examinations performed by an on-site radiologist blinded to telerobotic ultrasound findings. Multivariate analyses were performed to predict variables related to the visualization quality of abdominopelvic organs. Results: The sample included 40 patients (60% women; mean age, 51.2 ± 16.1 years; 35% overweight and 17.5% obese). Significant differences in ultrasound duration were observed between telerobotic ultrasound and standard ultrasound (27.4 ± 8.3 and 12.7 ± 3.1 min, respectively; p < 0.001). The mean satisfaction of radiologists, technicians, and patients with telerobotic ultrasound was high (7.35 ± 1.14 for radiologists, 7.93 ± 0.83 for technicians, and 8.43 ± 1.38 for patients). Visualization of anatomical structures was acceptable for most organs on telerobotic ultrasound but significantly worse than conventional ultrasound when "excellent visualization" was the reference standard. In addition, telerobotic ultrasound did not identify potentially relevant findings in a significant (70%) proportion of patients. Conclusions: Telerobotic ultrasound offers acceptable results in the assessment of abdominopelvic organs and can help provide adequate healthcare to patients in locations with limited access to radiology specialists. However, there are significant limitations compared to standard ultrasound for their optimal evaluation.