Literature DB >> 12574924

Comparison of conventional and gaze-down imaging in laparoscopic task performance.

S I Brown1, T G Frank, G El Shallaly, A Cuschieri.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In video-assisted laparoscopy, the image is usually displayed on a monitor placed at approximately eye level. Video projection systems project the image onto a screen placed close to the hands. This is said to be ergonomically superior. To evaluate this approach, a proprietary projection system (PS) was compared to a monitor display (MD).
METHOD: The resolution, ghosting, flickering, glare, contrast, color smear, and color matching of the two modalities were compared. A bowel-suturing task was employed to evaluate performance differences.
RESULTS: The image displayed by the first-generation PS is inferior to that of the MD in contrast and resolution measures, but it is comparable in the other image qualities. No significant differences in task performance were identified.
CONCLUSIONS: The first-generation PS does not confer performance or comfort advantages over an MD. The theoretical advantages of the gaze-down stance are likely to be realized only if a high-quality projector is used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12574924     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-002-8525-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  7 in total

1.  Comparison of a supplemental wide field of view versus a single field of view with zoom on performance in minimally invasive surgery.

Authors:  Alex Cao; R Darin Ellis; Elizabeth D Klein; Gregory W Auner; Michael D Klein; Abhilash K Pandya
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-10-31       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Skin wound closure with a novel shape-memory alloy fixator.

Authors:  Y Ng; S M Shimi; N Kernohan; T G Frank; P A Campbell; D Martin; J Gove; A Cuschieri
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-12-09       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Performance of basic manipulation and intracorporeal suturing tasks in a robotic surgical system: single- versus dual-monitor views.

Authors:  Rachit D Shah; Alex Cao; Lavie Golenberg; R Darin Ellis; Gregory W Auner; Abhilash K Pandya; Michael D Klein
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-07-12       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 4.  Optimal ergonomics for laparoscopic surgery in minimally invasive surgery suites: a review and guidelines.

Authors:  M J van Det; W J H J Meijerink; C Hoff; E R Totté; J P E N Pierie
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-10-02       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Monitor height ergonomics: A comparison of operating room video display terminals.

Authors:  Gregory I Kelts; Kevin C McMains; Phillip G Chen; Erik K Weitzel
Journal:  Allergy Rhinol (Providence)       Date:  2015-01

6.  Video display during laparoscopy - where should it be placed?

Authors:  Dominik A Walczak; Dariusz Pawełczak; Piotr Piotrowski; Piotr W Trzeciak; Adam Jędrzejczyk; Zbigniew Pasieka
Journal:  Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne       Date:  2014-12-04       Impact factor: 1.195

7.  Objective ergonomic risk assessment of wrist and spine with motion analysis technique during simulated laparoscopic cholecystectomy in experienced and novice surgeons.

Authors:  Twinkle Yogesh Dabholkar; Sujata Sudhir Yardi; Sanjay Narahari Oak; Sneha Ramchandani
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2017 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 1.407

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.