Table 5.
Purchase intention and reasonable price to buy the artificial intelligence–based surgical assistant system.
| Answers | Total (N=508), n (%) |
Gynecologists (N=278), n (%) |
General surgeons (N=173), n (%) |
Urologists (N=57), n (%) |
P value | ||||||
| Purchase intention | 423 (83.3) | 222 (79.9) | 151 (87.3) | 50 (87.7) | .08 | ||||||
| Reason to buy the system |
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
Comfort of laparoscopic surgery | 257 (50.6) | 142 (64.0) | 84 (55.6) | 31 (62.0) | .27 | |||||
|
|
Improved safety and maturity of laparoscopic surgery | 245 (48.2) | 126 (56.8) | 85 (56.3) | 34 (68.0) | .31 | |||||
|
|
Decreased number of assistants | 204 (40.2) | 101 (45.5) | 75 (49.7) | 28 (56.0) | .37 | |||||
|
|
Decreased burden of repetitive training for assistants | 197 (38.8) | 95 (42.8) | 82 (54.3) | 20 (4.0) | .06 | |||||
|
|
Reduced operation time | 119 (23.4) | 74 (33.3) | 27 (17.9) | 18 (36.0) | .002 | |||||
|
|
Improved convenience of research based on the autosave function | 114 (22.4) | 59 (26.6) | 39 (25.8) | 16 (32.0) | .68 | |||||
| Reasonable price (US$) |
|
|
|
|
.04 | ||||||
|
|
<30,000 | 87 (17.1) | 61 (21.9) | 21 (12.1) | 5 (8.8) |
|
|||||
|
|
30,000-50,000 | 151 (29.7) | 83 (29.9) | 53 (30.6) | 15 (26.3) |
|
|||||
|
|
50,000-100,000 | 139 (27.4) | 77 (27.7) | 43 (24.9) | 19 (33.3) |
|
|||||
|
|
100,000-150,000 | 79 (15.6) | 33 (11.9) | 36 (20.8) | 10 (17.5) |
|
|||||
|
|
150,000-200,000 | 28 (5.5) | 11 (4.0) | 13 (7.5) | 4 (7.0) |
|
|||||
|
|
≥200,000 | 24 (4.7) | 13 (4.7) | 7 (4.0) | 4 (7.0) |
|
|||||