A practical system for recording instrument interactions during live robotic surgery

Journal of Robotic Surgery

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 351-358

  McMahan, William ^a   Gomez, Ernest D ^b   Chen, Liting ^b   Bark, Karlin ^a   Nappo, John C ^a   Koch, Eza I ^a   Lee, David I ^b   Dumon, Kristoffel R ^b   Williams, Noel N ^b   Kuchenbecker, Katherine J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Haptics; Instrument interactions; Robotic instrumentation; Sensors; Technology assessment; Training; Vibrotactile feedback

Indexed keywords

FEEDBACK; TRANSPLANTATION (SURGICAL); VIBRATION ANALYSIS;

HAPTICS; HIGH-FREQUENCY VIBRATIONS; INSTRUMENT INTERACTION; MINIMALLY INVASIVE; PRACTICAL SYSTEMS; ROBOTIC/INSTRUMENTATION; ROBOTICS SURGERY; ROOT MEAN SQUARE; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTS; VIBRO-TACTILE FEEDBACKS;

ROBOTIC SURGERY;

EID: 84888287410     PISSN: 18632483     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-013-0399-y     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Audacity: free audio editor and recorder. http://audacity. sourceforge. net/. Accessed 7 Jan 2013.
2. Bark K, Gomez ED, Rivera C, McMahan W, Remington AC, Murayama KM, Dumon KR, Williams NN, Kuchenbecker KJ (2012) Surgical instrument vibrations are a construct-valid measure of technical skill in robotic peg transfer and suturing tasks. In: Proceedings of the Hamlyn Symposium on Medical Robotics, pp 50-51.
3. Bark K, McMahan W, Remington AC, Gewirtz J, Wedmid A, Lee DI, Kuchenbecker KJ (2012) In vivo validation of a system for haptic feedback of tool vibrations in robotic surgery. Surg Endosc. Available online at http://dx. doi. org/10. 1007/s00464-012-2452-8.
4. Bresciani JP, Ernst MO, Drewing K, Bouyer G, Maury V, Kheddar A (2005) Feeling what you heard: auditory signals can modulate tactile tap perception. Exp Brain Res 162(2): 172-180.
5. Darzi A, Smith S, Taffinder N (1999) Assessing operative skill needs to become more objective. Br Med J 318: 887-888.
6. Datta V, Mackay S, Mandalia M, Darzi A (2001) The use of electromagnetic motion tracking analysis to objectively measure open surgical skill in the laboratory-based model. J Am Coll Surg 193(5): 479-485.
7. DiMaio S, Hasser C (2008) The da Vinci research interface. Insight J. Available online at http://hdl. handle. net/10380/1464.
8. Goh AC, Goldfarb DW, Sander JC, Miles BJ, Dunkin BJ (2012) Global evaluative assessment of robotic skills: validation of a clinical assessment tool to measure robotic surgical skills. J Urol 187(1): 247-252.
9. Gomez ED, Bark K, Rivera C, McMahan W, Remington AC, Murayama KM, Dumon KR, Williams NN, Kuchenbecker KJ (2012) Construct validity of instrument vibrations as a measure of robotic surgical skill. J Am Coll Surg 215(3, Supplement): S119-S120.
10. Gomez ED, Weinstein GS, BW OMalley J, McMahan W, Chen L, Kuchenbecker KJ (2013) A practical system for recording instrument contacts and collisions during transoral robotic surgery. Accepted to the Triological Society 116th annual meeting.
11. Guthart GS, Salisbury JK (2000) The Intuitive™ telesurgery system: overview and application. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp 618-621.
12. Halsted W (1904) The training of the surgeon. Bull Johns Hopkins Hosp 15: 267-275.
13. Johansson RS, Flanagan JR (2009) Coding and use of tactile signals from the fingertips in object manipulation tasks. Nat Rev Neurosci 10(5): 345-359.
14. Kirkpatrick J, Naylor I (1997) The qualities and conduct of an English surgeon in 1446: as described in a manuscript attributed to Thomas Morstede. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 79(3): 225-228.
15. Klatzky RL, Lederman SJ (1999) Tactile roughness perception with a rigid link interposed between skin and surface. Percept Psychophys 61(4): 591-607.
16. Kumar R, Jog A, Malpani A, Vagvolgyi B, Yuh D, Nguyen H, Hager G, Chen CCG (2012) Assessing system operation skills in robotic surgery trainees. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 8(1): 118-124.
17. Lederman SJ (1979) Auditory texture perception. Perception 8(1): 93-103.
18. Lederman SJ, Klatzky RL, Morgan T, Hamilton C (2002) Integrating multimodal information about surface texture via a probe: relative contributions of haptic and touch-produced sound sources. In: Proceedings of IEEE symposium on haptic interfaces for virtual environment and teleoperator systems, pp 97-104.
19. Maggio MP, Parajon R, Kuchenbecker KJ (2012) Verroteach: visuo-audio-haptic training for dental caries detection. In: Proceedings of Annual American Dental Educator's Association (ADEA) Conference.
20. Martin JA, Regehr G, Reznick R, Macrae H, Murnaghan J, Hutchison C, Brown M (1997) Objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS) for surgical residents. Br J Surg 84(2): 273-278.
21. McMahan W, Gewirtz J, Standish D, Martin P, Kunkel JA, Lilavois M, Wedmid A, Lee DI, Kuchenbecker KJ (2011) Tool contact acceleration feedback for telerobotic surgery. IEEE Trans Haptics 4(3): 210-220.
22. Okamura AM (2009) Haptic feedback in robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery. Curr Opin Urol 19: 102-107.
23. Okamura AM, Verner LN, Yamamoto T, Gwilliam JC, Griffiths PG (2011) Force feedback and sensory substitution for robot-assisted surgery. In: Rosen J, Hannaford B, Satava RM (eds) Surgical robotics. Springer, Berlin, pp 419-448.
24. Reznick RK (1993) Teaching and testing technical skills. Am J Surg 165(3): 358-361.
25. Rosen J, Hannaford B, Satava RM (eds) (2011) Surgical robotics: systems, applications, and visions. Springer, Berlin.
26. Schreuder H, Wolswijk R, Zweemer R, Schijven M, Verheijen R (2012) Training and learning robotic surgery, time for a more structured approach: a systematic review. BJOG 119(2): 137-149.
27. Soto-Faraco S, Deco G (2009) Multisensory contributions to the perception of vibrotactile events. Behav Brain Res 196(2): 145-154.
28. van Hove PD, Tuijthof GJM, Verdaasdonk EGG, Stassen LPS, Dankelman J (2010) Objective assessment of technical surgical skills. Br J Surg 97(7): 972-987.
29. Zahariev MA, MacKenzie CL (2007) Grasping at 'thin air': Multimodal contact cues for reaching and grasping. Exp Brain Res 180(1): 69-84.
30. Zahariev MA, Mackenzie CL (2008) Auditory contact cues improve performance when grasping augmented and virtual objects with a tool. Exp Brain Res 186(4): 619-627.