Literature DB >> 33501324

Kinesthetic Device vs. Keyboard/Mouse: A Comparison in Home Care Telemanipulation.

Pascal Gliesche1, Tobias Krick2,3, Max Pfingsthorn4, Sandra Drolshagen4, Christian Kowalski1, Andreas Hein1,5.   

Abstract

Ensuring care is one of the biggest humanitarian challenges of the future since an acute shortage in nursing staff is expected. At the same time, this offers the opportunity for new technologies in nursing, as the use of robotic systems. One potential use case is outpatient care, which nowadays involves traveling long distances. Here, the use of telerobotics could provide a major relief for the nursing staff, as it could spare them many of those-partially far-journeys. Since autonomous robotic systems are not desired at least in Germany for ethical reasons, this paper evaluates the design of a telemanipulation system consisting of off-the-shelf components for outpatient care. Furthermore, we investigated the suitability of two different input devices for control, a kinesthetic device, and a keyboard plus mouse. We conducted the investigations in a laboratory study. This laboratory represents a realistic environment of an elderly home and a remote care service center. It was carried out with 25 nurses. Tasks common in outpatient care, such as handing out things (manipulation) and examining body parts (set camera view), were used in the study. After a short training period, all nurses were able to control a manipulator with the two input devices and perform the two tasks. It was shown that the Falcon leads to shorter execution times (on average 0:54.82 min, compared to 01:10.92 min with keyboard and mouse), whereby the participants were more successful with the keyboard plus mouse, in terms of task completion. There is no difference in usability and cognitive load. Moreover, we pointed out, that the access to this kind of technology is desirable, which is why we identified further usage scenarios.
Copyright © 2020 Gliesche, Krick, Pfingsthorn, Drolshagen, Kowalski and Hein.

Entities:  

Keywords:  human-robot interface; input device; outpatient care; telecare; telemanipulation; teleoperation systems; telerobotics

Year:  2020        PMID: 33501324      PMCID: PMC7805703          DOI: 10.3389/frobt.2020.561015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Robot AI        ISSN: 2296-9144


  4 in total

Review 1.  Early experience with telemanipulative robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy using da Vinci.

Authors:  Victor B Kim; William H H Chapman; Robert J Albrecht; B Marcus Bailey; James A Young; L Wiley Nifong; W Randolph Chitwood
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 1.719

Review 2.  Telemedicine and telecare for older patients--a systematic review.

Authors:  Neeltje van den Berg; Maika Schumann; Kathleen Kraft; Wolfgang Hoffmann
Journal:  Maturitas       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  A Telerobotic System for Transnasal Surgery.

Authors:  Jessica Burgner; D Caleb Rucker; Hunter B Gilbert; Philip J Swaney; Paul T Russell; Kyle D Weaver; Robert J Webster
Journal:  IEEE ASME Trans Mechatron       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 5.303

Review 4.  Digital technology and nursing care: a scoping review on acceptance, effectiveness and efficiency studies of informal and formal care technologies.

Authors:  Tobias Krick; Kai Huter; Dominik Domhoff; Annika Schmidt; Heinz Rothgang; Karin Wolf-Ostermann
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2019-06-20       Impact factor: 2.655

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.