You are presented with multiple paper abstracts, alongside the associated literature review and chapter titles. Given the provided information, you are going to do a literature review. Please generate a coherent literature review that synthesizes the content, draws connections between different works, highlights major findings, and identifies any gaps in the existing research.

Literature Review Title: Touchless computer interfaces in hospitals: A review 
Chapter Title:  users 
1. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB001):  As computerization in the nursing field has been recently progressing, an electronic nursing record system is gradually introduced in the medical institution in Japan. Although it is expected for the electronic nursing record system to reduce the load of nursing work, the conventional keyboard operation is used for information input of the present electronic nursing record system and it has some problems concerning the input time and the operationability for common nurses who are unfamiliar with the computer operation. In the present study, we conducted a basic study on application of voice recognition input to an electronic nursing record system. The voice input is recently introduced to an electronic medical record system in a few clinics. However, so far the entered information cannot be processed because the information of the medical record must be entered as a free sentence. Therefore, we contrived a template for an electronic nursing record system and introduced it to the system for simple information entry and easy processing of the entered information in this study. Furthermore, an input experiment for evaluation of the voice input with the template was carried out by voluntary subjects for evaluation of the function as an input interface of an electronic nursing record system. The results of the experiment revealed that the input time by the voice input is obviously fast compared with that by the keyboard input and operationability of the voice input was superior to the keyboard input although all subjects had inexperience of the voice input. As a result, it was suggested our method, the voice input using the template made by us, might be useful for an input interface of an electronic nursing record system. 
2. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB002):  There are few reports of institutional use of voice recognition technology in clinical practice. We describe our experience with voice recognition-integrated synoptic-like dictation, associating templates with key spoken phrases, that we have used in gross examination of common specimens and as a major component of our workflow since 2001. The primary application is VoiceOver Enterprise (Voicebrook, Lake Success, NY), which uses Dragon NaturallySpeaking Medical Edition (Nuance Communications, Burlington, MA) as its speech engine. This integrates with the anatomic pathology laboratory information system (APLIS) and other applications, such as Microsoft Office (Microsoft, Redmond, WA). The largest user group, pathology assistants, mainly dictates biopsy reports, numbering approximately 210,000 specimens since 2001. The technology has been useful in our anatomic pathology workflow and provided a good return on investment, including marked improvements in turnaround time, results standardization, error reduction, and cost savings. The most helpful features of the software are templating, the seamless integration with APLIS, and the voice command creation tools. 
3. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB003):  Keyboards, mice, and touch screens are a potential source of infection or contamination in operating rooms, intensive care units, and autopsy suites. The authors present a low-cost prototype of a system, which allows for touch-free control of a medical image viewer. This touch-free navigation system consists of a computer system (IMac, OS X 10.6 Apple, USA) with a medical image viewer (OsiriX, OsiriX foundation, Switzerland) and a depth camera (Kinect, Microsoft, USA). They implemented software that translates the data delivered by the camera and a voice recognition software into keyboard and mouse commands, which are then passed to OsiriX. In this feasibility study, the authors introduced 10 medical professionals to the system and asked them to re-create 12 images from a CT data set. They evaluated response times and usability of the system compared with standard mouse/keyboard control. Users felt comfortable with the system after approximately 10 minutes. Response time was 120 ms. Users required 1.4 times more time to re-create an image with gesture control. Users with OsiriX experience were significantly faster using the mouse/keyboard and faster than users without prior experience. They rated the system 3.4 out of 5 for ease of use in comparison to the mouse/keyboard. The touch-free, gesture-controlled system performs favorably and removes a potential vector for infection, protecting both patients and staff. Because the camera can be quickly and easily integrated into existing systems, requires no calibration, and is low cost, the barriers to using this technology are low. 
4. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB004):  There are several intra-operative use cases which require the surgeon to interact with medical devices. We used the Leap Motion Controller as input device and implemented two use-cases: 2D-Interaction (e.g. advancing EPR data) and selection of a value (e.g. room illumination brightness). The gesture detection was successful and we mapped its output to several devices and systems. 
5. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB005):  Introduction ::: Training surgeons in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) requires surgical residents to operate under the direction of a consultant. The inability of the instructing surgeon to point at the laparoscopic monitor without releasing the instruments remains a barrier to effective instruction. The wireless hands-free surgical pointer (WHaSP) has been developed to aid instruction during MIS.

Literature Review:
Mouse control was found to be faster than Kinect control, both with and without previous experience of the medical image viewing software. The inertial sensors were shown not to inhibit user's movement. System was deemed to be responsive and precise, albeit slower than a mouse and keyboard. Medical data browsing BIB001 Hospital employees 20 users Calibration took less than 10 s, and task completion rates were 95% or higher. 3D medical data navigation 11 Unspecified 18 users Users completed tasks faster when using interfaces with appropriate numbers of degrees of freedom. Presentation control BIB005 A Instructing surgeons (6), operating surgeons BIB006 and camera assistants (48) No negative effects on surgery completion time when using wireless hands-free surgical pointer (WHaSP). The WHaSP was found to be comfortable, easy to use and easy to control. Furthermore, the WHaSP improved communication effectiveness in the OR. Voice input to EHR BIB002 Nurses (7) and others (3) 10 users Voice input took an average of 304.5 s per record versus 1459 s for keyboard input. Creating and editing medical reports using voice control BIB003 Pathology assistants (48), residents  and attending physicians BIB004  Use of voice recognition has led to a marked reduction in report turnaround time (554-102 min). Creating and editing radiology reports using voice control 32