BACKGROUND: To improve patient safety, training of psychomotor laparoscopic skills is often done on virtual reality (VR) simulators outside the operating room. Haptic sensations have been found to influence psychomotor performance in laparoscopy. The emulation of haptic feedback is thus an important aspect of VR simulation. Some VR simulators try to simulate these sensations with handles equipped with haptic feedback. We conducted a survey on how laparoscopic surgeons perceive handles with and without haptic feedback. METHODS: Surgeons with different levels of experience in laparoscopy were asked to test two handles: Xitact IHP with haptic feedback and Xitact ITP without haptic feedback (Mentice AB, Gothenburg, Sweden), connected to the LapSim (Surgical Science AB, Sweden) VR simulator. They performed two tasks on the simulator before answering 12 questions regarding the two handles. The surgeons were not informed about the differences in the handles. RESULTS: A total of 85 % of the 20 surgeons who participated in the survey claimed that it is important that handles with haptic feedback feel realistic. Ninety percent of the surgeons preferred the handles without haptic feedback. The friction in the handles with haptic feedback was perceived to be as in reality (5 %) or too high (95 %). Regarding the handles without haptic feedback, the friction was perceived as in reality (45 %), too low (50 %), or too high (5 %). A total of 85 % of the surgeons thought that the handle with haptic feedback attempts to simulate the resistance offered by tissue to deformation. Ten percent thought that the handle succeeds in doing so. CONCLUSIONS: The surveyed surgeons believe that haptic feedback is an important feature on VR simulators; however, they preferred the handles without haptic feedback because they perceived the handles with haptic feedback to add additional friction, making them unrealistic and not mechanically transparent.
BACKGROUND: To improve patient safety, training of psychomotor laparoscopic skills is often done on virtual reality (VR) simulators outside the operating room. Haptic sensations have been found to influence psychomotor performance in laparoscopy. The emulation of haptic feedback is thus an important aspect of VR simulation. Some VR simulators try to simulate these sensations with handles equipped with haptic feedback. We conducted a survey on how laparoscopic surgeons perceive handles with and without haptic feedback. METHODS: Surgeons with different levels of experience in laparoscopy were asked to test two handles: Xitact IHP with haptic feedback and Xitact ITP without haptic feedback (Mentice AB, Gothenburg, Sweden), connected to the LapSim (Surgical Science AB, Sweden) VR simulator. They performed two tasks on the simulator before answering 12 questions regarding the two handles. The surgeons were not informed about the differences in the handles. RESULTS: A total of 85 % of the 20 surgeons who participated in the survey claimed that it is important that handles with haptic feedback feel realistic. Ninety percent of the surgeons preferred the handles without haptic feedback. The friction in the handles with haptic feedback was perceived to be as in reality (5 %) or too high (95 %). Regarding the handles without haptic feedback, the friction was perceived as in reality (45 %), too low (50 %), or too high (5 %). A total of 85 % of the surgeons thought that the handle with haptic feedback attempts to simulate the resistance offered by tissue to deformation. Ten percent thought that the handle succeeds in doing so. CONCLUSIONS: The surveyed surgeons believe that haptic feedback is an important feature on VR simulators; however, they preferred the handles without haptic feedback because they perceived the handles with haptic feedback to add additional friction, making them unrealistic and not mechanically transparent.
Authors: Rajesh Aggarwal; Teodor P Grantcharov; Jens R Eriksen; Dorthe Blirup; Viggo B Kristiansen; Peter Funch-Jensen; Ara Darzi Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Gunnar Ahlberg; Lars Enochsson; Anthony G Gallagher; Leif Hedman; Christian Hogman; David A McClusky; Stig Ramel; C Daniel Smith; Dag Arvidsson Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Mohamad W Salkini; Charles R Doarn; Nicholai Kiehl; Timothy J Broderick; James F Donovan; Krishnanath Gaitonde Journal: J Endourol Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Ben Sainsbury; Maciej Łącki; Mohammed Shahait; Mitchell Goldenberg; Amir Baghdadi; Lora Cavuoto; Jing Ren; Mark Green; Jason Lee; Timothy D Averch; Carlos Rossa Journal: Front Robot AI Date: 2020-01-14
Authors: Carmelo Pirri; Carla Stecco; Andrea Porzionato; Rafael Boscolo-Berto; René H Fortelny; Veronica Macchi; Marko Konschake; Stefano Merigliano; Raffaele De Caro Journal: Front Surg Date: 2021-06-23