Bloodbot draws blood, inspires fear
By Joseph L. Flatley 
posted Sep 16th 2009 2:06PM
posted Sep 16th 2009 2:06PM
We've seen our fair share of scary robots in these parts, and we're not going to mince words here: there is no way we are going anywhere near one that's armed with a hypodermic needle -- and we sure as hell aren't going to sit still and let it draw blood! Currently being developed by a team at Imperial College in London, the Bloodbot is designed to probe your arm for the presence of a vein, stick you with the needle, puncture the vein, and then stop short of rupture. The system, which has thus far only been tested on one patient (sounds like we're not the only ones with reservations regarding the device) has been accurate about 78 percent of the time, meaning it only resulted in screaming fits 22 percent of the time -- unlike your friendly neighborhood nurse or medical technician, who is accurate nearly 100 percent of the time (and still inspires the occasional fit, but that's another story).
[Via Switched]
[Via Switched]
Good lord! This scares the bejesus out of me!
im woozy.
Me too!
Imperial College??? Bloodbot?????
I work as a emergency physician and find the reporting from Engadget a bit biased. Like all studies, 78% as a number means little unless the demographics and study design is known. In addition, human phlebotomy procedures is nowhere near perfect. I can definitely see the benefit of machine-aided attempts to obtain venous access. The pictures don't indicate it, but the promiseland is practical automated iv access coupled with Doppler ultrasonigraphic probes. There are times when lifesaving venous access is urgently needed and no human being within close proximity can obtain it rapidly enough!!! And if you ever had a loved-one in that situation, you know what I'm talking about. These are moments where the only alternatives include far more dangerous central access including into bone.
So all the sly remarks not withstanding, this direction of technology has long been overdue for the past 30 years.
Or we could just focus on more netbooks and smartphones.
So, they've had ONE tester, and it was accurate 78% of the time. That's not really a round number like 75% that would be 3/4, so this one sad person has been stuck by this thing a whole lot of times AND it wasn't accurate 22% of the time? OUCH!!
Rdrunner: Make sure you don't mess with the combat inhibitor chip.
Do they make one that injects the proper dose of Heroin?
I'm pretty sure that arm is rubber. The fingertips look squarish.
The problem is the form factor used. I bet that you would mind less if it didn't look like it once belong to the Terminator... Why don't they make some kind of box where you stick your arm and the needle is correctly placed without using a scary robotic arm?
@Rdrunner
78% with 1 patient. Means it will miss every fifth time and on some rare occasions.
Add another patient and statistics will change.
If you want to see this 'bot in the 'flesh' it's on display at the Hunterian Museum, London until 23 December 09 as part of a new exhibition on Medical Robots.
There's some pretty cool stuff there including mini-bots designed to crawl and swim around inside you and a section on robot surgeons in science fiction.
check it out http://www.rcseng.ac.uk/museums/exhibitions/sci-fi-surgery
It's free to visit too :)
This is veeeery scary, "Need your blood for energy and takeover ha! ha! ha! all ur base r belong 2 us"
lol +1
is it me or is that needle not straight as if something went wrong with the first patient :(
Lord please save us
All your blood...
Ahhhhhh oh god no never, that machine is for no.
Don't kid yourself, doctors are 0% successful, they NEVER draw blood. Nurses and techs are much more skilled in those mundane things.
You're right! As a spectacularly healthy specimen I very rarely have blood drawn. Thanks for the tip.
@joseph.flatley, if you are healthy that's the reason to be giving blood. :)
@templarian
+1 to you, very good point.
thats not true.I had to draw blood when i was a medical intern.I dont do it now but its something we need to know in case of emergency.
As someone who has gave blood at least 5 times, I can tell you I've seen plenty of misses. I've only had a nurse miss my veins once, but I've known people that it always takes at least two tries on. If this robot can get to a 100% success rate, I'd take it over a nurse or tech any day. Then again, I'm not scared of needles or robots, and actually believe that if humanity was stomped out by robots it would be our biggest success, so maybe I'm not the best to judge.
My wife has small veins that roll. I've seen numerous techs try to get an iv in her over a dozen times in one visit without success. They come in and say all patients say they are difficult and after a few tries and digging around for the vein they give up and someone else comes along and in the end she comes out with bruises all over her arm.
If the person they are testing this on is as hard to get a iv in as her then a 78% success rate is fantastic.
I've never been that scared of needles, but this thing freaks me out.
I'm with you. I don't really care about needle, I have blood tests every month but no way, that robot is never gonna do it!
Do you think they have enough metal to reinforce the back pressure of the needle?? this thing could pierce rock!
78%.
Never ever ever.
Does it work via WebMD?
Didn't we see this in Judge Dread a looooong time ago?
Exactly what assembly-line type hospital would this thing be located at?
I have never seen a really long line at the laboratories section of my medical clinic; it appears that the technicians spend most of their time goofing off... err... I mean engaged in other priority activites unrelated to blood/speciman testing.
So exactly what problem is this trying to solve?
In the hospital where i work,I had to draw about a hundred blood samples a week when i was an intern(Doctor in training).So its really welcome.
Its improving the state of medical robotics. It is certainly not being designed as a product in itself.
I imagine the technology being developed here would be very useful in a battlefield medical robot. Recover a wounded soldier and stick an IV in his/her arm while traveling back towards safety.
Luke is absolutely correct.... I'm a nuclear medicine tech and in all my time working in a hospital (10+ years) I've only seen 2 doctors start an IV. Its all the techs and nurses.
Over 98% of the patients I do require an injection of some sort, but as far as this machine/robot goes I'm going to stick with the old fashioned way. First, I like the challenge, and second, I already get looked at funny by most of my patients when I tell them I'm going to inject them with a radioactive material... as soon as I pull this out, they'd probably either pass out on me or run away screaming. I'll pass.
"Alright Sir now just sit down here at our state-of-the-art BLDSCKR 2012 electronic phlebotomist for your injection of radioactive dye and we'll... hello?"
Me knees went weak and I think I gagged a little bit.
That is easily the scariest thing I've ever seen.
Why are we enabling our eventual overthrow?
I, for one, welcome our hypodermic wielding robotic overlords. Huzzah!!
@Twanzio
dangit you beat me to it
They should replace that robot to a terminator.
I say that a 22% mutilation-rate is appropriate insurance paid against Luddism.
If only one person has ever had this bot draw blood then how can they have an accurate enough reading of its success to say that it is 78% effective? I realize there are "dummies" they are using this on, but those are only so real. I'll believe it's effectiveness once it has successfully drawn blood from a real person who is scared out of their mind and squirming around...
Maybe this person is so brave that they have taken hundreds of needle sticks to get it right?
"I'm not a heroin addict; I'm an robotics engineer; honest!"
Thank you Engadget. Now I know what my next nightmare will be about.
NO thanks.
It doesn't look so bad. I'll let them use this on me when it eventually shows up in my doctor's office.
US immigration requires/required an HIV test as part of the green card application process. The regs required a doctor to draw the blood. A nurse or phlebotomist, who would have far more experience in the whole needle business, was not permitted. This was a nasty, painful experience and I had a giant bruise for some time afterwards. A bot like this: too visible; too scary; I'll take the doc instead.
i could see this used a plasma clinics. if you have ever been to one some of the "nurses" have worse accuracy.
How about... no? "And stop short of rupture" is all I need to hear to never let this thing near me. And WTF did it do the other 22 percent of the time? "accidently" stick a needle in the persons eye?
OMG I can't even imagine this robot trying to draw blood from me with a 78% success rate....scary T_T