Literature DB >> 28190372

Training Performance of Laparoscopic Surgery in Two- and Three-Dimensional Displays.

Chiuhsiang Joe Lin1, Chih-Feng Cheng1, Hung-Jen Chen1, Kuan-Ying Wu1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This research investigated differences in the effects of a state-of-art stereoscopic 3-dimensional (3D) display and a traditional 2-dimensional (2D) display in simulated laparoscopic surgery over a longer duration than in previous publications and studied the learning effects of the 2 display systems on novices.
METHODS: A randomized experiment with 2 factors, image dimensions and image sequence, was conducted to investigate differences in the mean movement time, the mean error frequency, NASA-TLX cognitive workload, and visual fatigue in pegboard and circle-tracing tasks.
RESULTS: The stereoscopic 3D display had advantages in mean movement time ( P < .001 and P = .002) and mean error frequency ( P = .010 and P = .008) in both the tasks. There were no significant differences in the objective visual fatigue ( P = .729 and P = .422) and in the NASA-TLX ( P = .605 and P = .937) cognitive workload between the 3D and the 2D displays on both the tasks. For the learning effect, participants who used the stereoscopic 3D display first had shorter mean movement time in the 2D display environment on both the pegboard ( P = .011) and the circle-tracing ( P = .017) tasks.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this research suggest that a stereoscopic system would not result in higher objective visual fatigue and cognitive workload than a 2D system, and it might reduce the performance time and increase the precision of surgical operations. In addition, learning efficiency of the stereoscopic system on the novices in this study demonstrated its value for training and education in laparoscopic surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ergonomics and/or human factors study; image-guided surgery; simulation

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28190372     DOI: 10.1177/1553350617692638

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Innov        ISSN: 1553-3506            Impact factor:   2.058


  6 in total

1.  The use of 3D laparoscopic imaging systems in surgery: EAES consensus development conference 2018.

Authors:  Alberto Arezzo; Nereo Vettoretto; Nader K Francis; Marco Augusto Bonino; Nathan J Curtis; Daniele Amparore; Simone Arolfo; Manuel Barberio; Luigi Boni; Ronit Brodie; Nicole Bouvy; Elisa Cassinotti; Thomas Carus; Enrico Checcucci; Petra Custers; Michele Diana; Marilou Jansen; Joris Jaspers; Gadi Marom; Kota Momose; Beat P Müller-Stich; Kyokazu Nakajima; Felix Nickel; Silvana Perretta; Francesco Porpiglia; Francisco Sánchez-Margallo; Juan A Sánchez-Margallo; Marlies Schijven; Gianfranco Silecchia; Roberto Passera; Yoav Mintz
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Development and clinical applications of glasses-free three-dimensional (3D) display technology for thoracoscopic surgery.

Authors:  Jun Liu; Fei Cui; Jingpei Li; Wenlong Shao; Wei Wang; Jun Li; Muchun Liu; Jianxing He
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-06

3.  Three-dimensional Versus Two-dimensional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  George Pantalos; Dimitrios Patsouras; Eleftherios Spartalis; Dimitrios Dimitroulis; Gerasimos Tsourouflis; Nikolaos Nikiteas
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2020 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.155

Review 4.  Endoscopy training in Korea.

Authors:  Joon Sung Kim; Byung-Wook Kim
Journal:  Korean J Intern Med       Date:  2019-02-25       Impact factor: 2.884

5.  Eye Movement Parameters for Performance Evaluation in Projection-based Stereoscopic Display.

Authors:  Chiuhsiang Joe Lin; Yogi Tri Prasetyo; Retno Widyaningrum
Journal:  J Eye Mov Res       Date:  2018-11-20       Impact factor: 0.957

6.  Laparoscopic skills training: the effects of viewing mode (2D vs. 3D) on skill acquisition and transfer.

Authors:  Kirsty L Beattie; Andrew Hill; Mark S Horswill; Philip M Grove; Andrew R L Stevenson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-09-02       Impact factor: 4.584

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.