Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.3389/frobt.2020.622083 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.3389/frobt.2020.622083 33681298!7925889!33681298     free     free     free Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=33681298&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215       Front+Robot+AI 2020 ; 7 (?): 622083 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=33681298|t=2020. Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Cadaveric Skull Opening: A New Method of Autopsy Procedure |pdf=|usr=}}{{33681298}} gab.com Text Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Cadaveric Skull Opening: A New Method of Autopsy Procedure JO: Front Robot AI http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33681298 #FOAvip Background: Sawing of bone is an essential part of an autopsy procedure. An oscillating saw always generates noise, fine infectious dust particles, and the possibility of traumatic injuries, all of which can induce occupational hazard risks to autopsy workers, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objectives: The first goal of this study was to explore the production of noise and bone dust emission, comparing an oscillating saw and a robotic autopsy saw during an autopsy. The second goal was to evaluate the performance of a new robotic autopsy method, used during skull opening. The third goal was to encourage mortuary workers to use robotic technology during the autopsy procedure to protect us away from occupational injuries as well as airborne infections. Materials and Methods: The experiments involved a comparison of noise levels and aerosol production during skull cutting between the oscillating saw and the robotic autopsy saw. Results: The results confirmed that noise production from the robotic autopsy saw was lower than the oscillating saw. However, the bone dust levels, produced by the robotic autopsy saw, were greater than the oscillating saw, but were not greater than the dust concentrations which were present before opening the skull. Conclusions: The use of a new robotic system might be an alternative choice for protecting against occupational damage among the healthcare workers. Further research might attempt to consider other healthcare problems which occur in the autopsy workplace and apply the robotic-assisted technology in autopsy surgery. Twit Text FOAVip Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Cadaveric Skull Opening: A New Method of Autopsy Procedure ????Front Robot AI http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33681298 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33681298 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|33681298}}</ref> Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Cadaveric Skull Opening: A New Method of Autopsy Procedure #MMPMID33681298 Jumlongkul A; Chutivongse P Front Robot AI 2020[]; 7 (?): 622083 PMID33681298show ga Background: Sawing of bone is an essential part of an autopsy procedure. An oscillating saw always generates noise, fine infectious dust particles, and the possibility of traumatic injuries, all of which can induce occupational hazard risks to autopsy workers, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objectives: The first goal of this study was to explore the production of noise and bone dust emission, comparing an oscillating saw and a robotic autopsy saw during an autopsy. The second goal was to evaluate the performance of a new robotic autopsy method, used during skull opening. The third goal was to encourage mortuary workers to use robotic technology during the autopsy procedure to protect us away from occupational injuries as well as airborne infections. Materials and Methods: The experiments involved a comparison of noise levels and aerosol production during skull cutting between the oscillating saw and the robotic autopsy saw. Results: The results confirmed that noise production from the robotic autopsy saw was lower than the oscillating saw. However, the bone dust levels, produced by the robotic autopsy saw, were greater than the oscillating saw, but were not greater than the dust concentrations which were present before opening the skull. Conclusions: The use of a new robotic system might be an alternative choice for protecting against occupational damage among the healthcare workers. Further research might attempt to consider other healthcare problems which occur in the autopsy workplace and apply the robotic-assisted technology in autopsy surgery. ?Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Cadaveric Skull Opening: A New Method of (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing