title: Factors influencing the genesis of neurosurgical technology.
abstract: For any new technology to gain acceptance, it must not only adequately fill a true need, but must also function optimally within the confines of coexisting technology and concurrently available support systems. As an example, over the first decades of the 20th century, a number of drill designs used to perform cranial bone cuts appeared, fell out of favor, and later reappeared as certain supportive technologies emerged. Ultimately, it was the power source that caused one device to prevail. In contrast, a brilliant imaging device, designed to demonstrate an axial view of the lumbar spine, was never allowed to gain acceptance because it was immediately superseded by another device of no greater innovation, but one that performed optimally with popular support technology. The authors discuss the factors that have bearing on the evolution of neurosurgical technology.
authors.affiliation: Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, California, USA.
authors.forename: William C
authors.initials: WC
authors.lastname: Bergman
authors.forename: Raymond A
authors.initials: RA
authors.lastname: Schulz
authors.forename: Deanna S
authors.initials: DS
authors.lastname: Davis
mesh_terms: D003399:Craniotomy / Q000266:history / Q000295:instrumentation; D004059:Diffusion of Innovation; D049673:History, 20th Century; D006801:Humans; D008159:Lumbar Vertebrae / Q000033:anatomy & histology; D008490:Medical Informatics; D009493:Neurosurgery / Q000266:history* / Q000295:instrumentation; D019635:Neurosurgical Procedures / Q000266:history / Q000295:instrumentation; D025321:Surgery, Computer-Assisted; D013525:Surgical Instruments / Q000266:history; D013672:Technology / Q000266:history* / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D014207:Trephining / Q000266:history / Q000295:instrumentation