Literature DB >> 28914409

Evaluation of contactless human-machine interface for robotic surgical training.

Fabien Despinoy1,2, Nabil Zemiti3, Germain Forestier4, Alonso Sánchez3, Pierre Jannin5, Philippe Poignet3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Teleoperated robotic systems are nowadays routinely used for specific interventions. Benefits of robotic training courses have already been acknowledged by the community since manipulation of such systems requires dedicated training. However, robotic surgical simulators remain expensive and require a dedicated human-machine interface.
METHODS: We present a low-cost contactless optical sensor, the Leap Motion, as a novel control device to manipulate the RAVEN-II robot. We compare peg manipulations during a training task with a contact-based device, the electro-mechanical Sigma.7. We perform two complementary analyses to quantitatively assess the performance of each control method: a metric-based comparison and a novel unsupervised spatiotemporal trajectory clustering.
RESULTS: We show that contactless control does not offer as good manipulability as the contact-based. Where part of the metric-based evaluation presents the mechanical control better than the contactless one, the unsupervised spatiotemporal trajectory clustering from the surgical tool motions highlights specific signature inferred by the human-machine interfaces.
CONCLUSIONS: Even if the current implementation of contactless control does not overtake manipulation with high-standard mechanical interface, we demonstrate that using the optical sensor complete control of the surgical instruments is feasible. The proposed method allows fine tracking of the trainee's hands in order to execute dexterous laparoscopic training gestures. This work is promising for development of future human-machine interfaces dedicated to robotic surgical training systems.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Contactless teleoperation; Hand tracking; Human–machine interface; Robotic surgical training; Unsupervised trajectory analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28914409     DOI: 10.1007/s11548-017-1666-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg        ISSN: 1861-6410            Impact factor:   2.924


  22 in total

Review 1.  A new paradigm for surgical procedural training.

Authors:  Ajit K Sachdeva; Jo Buyske; Gary L Dunnington; Hilary A Sanfey; John D Mellinger; Daniel J Scott; Richard Satava; Gerald M Fried; Lenworth M Jacobs; Karyl J Burns
Journal:  Curr Probl Surg       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.909

2.  Classification of surgical processes using dynamic time warping.

Authors:  Germain Forestier; Florent Lalys; Laurent Riffaud; Brivael Trelhu; Pierre Jannin
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2011-11-20       Impact factor: 6.317

Review 3.  Review of surgical robotics user interface: what is the best way to control robotic surgery?

Authors:  Anton Simorov; R Stephen Otte; Courtni M Kopietz; Dmitry Oleynikov
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-02-21       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 4.  Training and learning robotic surgery, time for a more structured approach: a systematic review.

Authors:  H W R Schreuder; R Wolswijk; R P Zweemer; M P Schijven; R H M Verheijen
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2011-10-10       Impact factor: 6.531

5.  A global assessment tool for evaluation of intraoperative laparoscopic skills.

Authors:  Melina C Vassiliou; Liane S Feldman; Christopher G Andrew; Simon Bergman; Karen Leffondré; Donna Stanbridge; Gerald M Fried
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 2.565

6.  The frequency of human, manual adjustments in balancing an inverted pendulum is constrained by intrinsic physiological factors.

Authors:  Ian D Loram; Peter J Gawthrop; Martin Lakie
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2006-09-14       Impact factor: 5.182

7.  Development of a model for training and evaluation of laparoscopic skills.

Authors:  A M Derossis; G M Fried; M Abrahamowicz; H H Sigman; J S Barkun; J L Meakins
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 2.565

8.  Initial Experiments with the Leap Motion as a User Interface in Robotic Endonasal Surgery.

Authors:  T A Travaglini; P J Swaney; Kyle D Weaver; R J Webster
Journal:  Robot Mechatron (2015)       Date:  2015-09-22

9.  An analysis of the precision and reliability of the leap motion sensor and its suitability for static and dynamic tracking.

Authors:  Jože Guna; Grega Jakus; Matevž Pogačnik; Sašo Tomažič; Jaka Sodnik
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2014-02-21       Impact factor: 3.576

10.  Adverse Events in Robotic Surgery: A Retrospective Study of 14 Years of FDA Data.

Authors:  Homa Alemzadeh; Jaishankar Raman; Nancy Leveson; Zbigniew Kalbarczyk; Ravishankar K Iyer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-04-20       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  2 in total

1.  Use of Commercial Off-The-Shelf Devices for the Detection of Manual Gestures in Surgery: Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Fernando Alvarez-Lopez; Marcelo Fabián Maina; Francesc Saigí-Rubió
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2019-04-14       Impact factor: 5.428

2.  Preliminary design and evaluation of a remote tele-mentoring system for minimally invasive surgery.

Authors:  Dehlela Shabir; Nihal Abdurahiman; Jhasketan Padhan; Malek Anbatawi; May Trinh; Shidin Balakrishnan; Abdulla Al-Ansari; Elias Yaacoub; Zhigang Deng; Aiman Erbad; Amr Mohammed; Nikhil V Navkar
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-03-04       Impact factor: 4.584

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.