The effect of haptic degrees of freedom on task performance in virtual surgical environments

Studies in Health Technology and Informatics

Volumn 184, Issue , 2013, Pages 129-135

  Forsslund, Jonas ^a   Selesnick, Joshua ^b   Salisbury, Kenneth ^a,b   Silva, Rebeka G ^c   Blevins, Nikolas H ^b  

^a Stanford University   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

haptic rendering; haptics; surgical simulation; task performance

Indexed keywords

SURGERY; VIRTUAL REALITY;

COMPUTED TORQUE; HAPTIC FEEDBACKS; HAPTIC RENDERING; HAPTICS; SURGICAL ENVIRONMENT; SURGICAL SIMULATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; UNDERACTUATED;

DEGREES OF FREEDOM (MECHANICS);

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; COMPUTER INTERFACE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY; STIMULATION; TOUCH;

BIOFEEDBACK, PSYCHOLOGY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MOVEMENT; PHYSICAL STIMULATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TOUCH; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; YOUNG ADULT;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84879517273     PISSN: 09269630     EISSN: 18798365     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.3233/978-1-61499-209-7-129     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. P. Ström et al., Early exposure to haptic feedback enhances performance in surgical simulator training, Surgical Endoscopy 20 (2006), 1383-1388
2. O. A. J. van der Meijden, and M. P. Schijven, The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robotassisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: A current review, Surgical Endoscopy 23 (2009), 1180-1190
3. L. Panait et al., The role of haptic feedback in laparoscopic simulation training, The Journal of Surgical Research 156 (2009), 312-316
4. M. K. Chmarra et al., Force feedback and basic laparoscopic skills, Surgical Endoscopy 22 (2008), 2140-2148
5. H. K. Kim, D. W. Rattner, and M. A. Srinivasan, The Role of Simulation Fidelity in Laparoscopic Surgical Training, In Proc. MICCAI (2003), 1-8
6. K. S. Lehmann et al., A prospective randomized study to test the transfer of basic psychomotor skills from virtual reality to physical reality in a comparable training setting, Annals of Surgery 241 (2005), 442-449
7. P. H. Cosman et al., Virtual reality simulators: Current status in acquisition and assessment of surgical skills, ANZ Journal of Surgery 72 (2002), 30-34
8. C. R. Wagner, N. Stylopoulos, and R. D. Howe, The role of force feedback in surgery: analysis of blunt dissection, In Proc. IEEE Haptics Symposium (2002), 68-74
9. S. Wang, and M. A. Srinivasan, The role of torque in haptic perception of object location in virtual environments, In Proc. IEEE Haptics Symposium (2003), 302-309
10. L. N. Verner, and A. M. Okamura, Force & torque vs force only feedback, In Proc. IEEE World Haptics (2009), 406-410
11. R.Weller, and G. Zachmann, User Performance in complex bi-manual haptic manipulation with 3 DOFs vs. 6 DOFs, In Proc. IEEE Haptics Symposium (2012), 315-322
12. M. Agus et al., Real-time haptic and visual simulation of bone dissection, Presence 12 (2003), 110-122
13. D. Morris et al., Visuohaptic simulation of bone surgery for training and evaluation, IEEE Computer (2006), 48-57
14. P. Trier et al., The visible ear surgery simulator, Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 132 (2008), 523-525
15. F. Barbagli, and K. Salisbury, The effect of sensor/actuator asymmetries in haptic interfaces, In Proc. IEEE Haptics Symposium (2003), 140-147
16. S. Chan et al., Constraint-based six degree-of-freedom haptic rendering of volume-embedded isosurfaces, In Proc. IEEE World Haptics (2011), 89-94.