Thomas Kerwin1, Brad Hittle2, Sonny Chan3, Don Stredney2, Gregory Wiet4,5. 1. Ohio Supercomputer Center, 1224 Kinnear Road, Columbus, OH, 43212, USA. kerwin@osc.edu. 2. Ohio Supercomputer Center, 1224 Kinnear Road, Columbus, OH, 43212, USA. 3. University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr. NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada. 4. Department of Otolaryngology, The Ohio State University, 4000 Eye and Ear Institute, 915 Olentangry River Road, Columbus, OH, 43212, USA. 5. Nationwide Children's Hospital, 700 Children's Drive, Columbus, OH, 43205, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: A haptic algorithm to simulate the interaction between a surgical drill and bone using a constraint-based algorithm has been previously demonstrated. However, there has been no blinded study to determine whether this algorithm is preferred by professionals who commonly use this type of system METHODS: Fourteen otologic surgeons were presented with a spring-damper model and a constraint-based model of drill-bone interaction rendered on a low-cost haptic device with only linear feedback. The participants were blinded as to what algorithm they were using. They then answered survey questions about their opinions of the models. RESULTS: The surgeons overwhelmingly preferred the constraint-based model. They generally preferred the constraint-based model in the individual questions as well. CONCLUSIONS: Follow-up work can be done to fine-tune the parameters in the model, but this study shows that a sophisticated algorithm can make a significant difference even on a low-fidelity haptic device.
PURPOSE: A haptic algorithm to simulate the interaction between a surgical drill and bone using a constraint-based algorithm has been previously demonstrated. However, there has been no blinded study to determine whether this algorithm is preferred by professionals who commonly use this type of system METHODS: Fourteen otologic surgeons were presented with a spring-damper model and a constraint-based model of drill-bone interaction rendered on a low-cost haptic device with only linear feedback. The participants were blinded as to what algorithm they were using. They then answered survey questions about their opinions of the models. RESULTS: The surgeons overwhelmingly preferred the constraint-based model. They generally preferred the constraint-based model in the individual questions as well. CONCLUSIONS: Follow-up work can be done to fine-tune the parameters in the model, but this study shows that a sophisticated algorithm can make a significant difference even on a low-fidelity haptic device.
Entities:
Keywords:
Haptics; Surgical simulation; User study