An anthropomorphic design for a minimally invasive surgical system based on a survey of surgical technologies, techniques and training

International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 368-378

  Tzemanaki, Antonia ^a,b   Walters, Peter ^a,b   Pipe, Anthony Graham ^a,b   Melhuish, Chris ^a   Dogramadzi, Sanja ^a,b  

^a BRISTOL ROBOTICS LABORATORY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST OF ENGLAND   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Focus groups; Hand exoskeleton; Minimally invasive surgery; Multi fingered instruments; Robot assisted surgery; Shape memory alloy actuators; Survey

Indexed keywords

ACTUATORS; EXOSKELETON (ROBOTICS); MACHINE DESIGN; ROBOTIC SURGERY; SHAPE MEMORY EFFECT;

ANTHROPOMORPHIC DESIGN; FOCUS GROUPS; HAND EXOSKELETON; MINIMALLY-INVASIVE SURGERY; MULTI-FINGERED; MULTI-FINGERED INSTRUMENT; ROBOT-ASSISTED SURGERY; SHAPE MEMORY ALLOY ACTUATORS; SURGICAL SYSTEMS; SURGICAL TRAINING;

SURVEYS;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; ERGONOMICS; FEMALE; FORCE; HAND EXOSKELETON; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGICAL INSTRUMENT; LAPAROSCOPY; LEARNING CURVE; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; OPEN SURGERY; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANGE OF MOTION; ROBOT ASSISTED SURGERY; SOFTWARE; SURGEON; SURGICAL EQUIPMENT; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SURGICAL TECHNOLOGY; SURGICAL TRAINING; ANTHROPOMETRY; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; DEVICES; GENERAL SURGERY; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LEARNING; PROCEDURES; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURE; ROBOTICS;

ALLOY;

ALLOYS; ANTHROPOMETRY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FOCUS GROUPS; GENERAL SURGERY; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; LEARNING; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGICAL PROCEDURES; QUESTIONNAIRES; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; ROBOTICS; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 84908264465     PISSN: 14785951     EISSN: 1478596X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/rcs.1544     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Jonsdottir GM, Jorgensen S, Cohen SL, et al. Increasing minimally invasive hysterectomy: effect on cost and complications. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117(5): 1142-9.
2. Allemann P, Leroy J, Asakuma M, et al. Robotics may overcome technical limitations of single-trocar surgery: an experimental prospective study of Nissen fundoplication. Arch Surg (Chicago, IL) 1960; 145(3): 267-271.
3. Cancer Research UK. Cancer incidence statistics for the UK, 2012: http://publications.cancerresearchuk.org/downloads/Product/CS CS INCIDENCE.pdf
4. Solly J, Bunce C, Cowley S. Focus on cholecystectomy. J One Day Surg 2006; 17(1): 15-18.
5. Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES). Integrating advanced laparoscopy into surgical residency training - a SAGES position paper. 2009; 1-5. Available from:http://www.sages.org/publications/guidelines/integrating-advanced-laparoscopy-into-surgical-residency-training-a-sages-position-paper [accessed September 2013].
6. Dankelman J, Painter F, Schanker B, et al. Increasing Complexity of Medical Technology and Consequences for Training and Outcome of Care. World Health Organization: Geneva, 2010.
7. Doné K, DiMartino A, Judkins T, et al. Evaluation of laparoscopic tools for usability and comfort. In Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 48th Annual Meeting. HFES: New Orleans, LA; 1359-1362.
8. Reyes DAG, Tang B, Cuschieri A. Minimal access surgery (MAS)-related surgeon morbidity syndromes. Surg Endosc Other Intervent Techniques 2006; 20(1): 1-13.
9. Berguer R, Hreljac A. The relationship between hand size and difficulty using surgical instruments a survey of 726 laparoscopic surgeons. Surg Endosc Other Intervent Techniques 2004; 18(3): 508-512.
10. Tan LC, Samanta S, Hosking SW. Safe transition from open to laparoscopic fundoplication by an established consultant - the importance of repeated audit. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2002; 84(2): 84-8.
11. Soot SJ, Eshraghi N, Farahmand M, et al. Transition from Open to Laparoscopic Fundoplication: the Learning Curve. Technical Report 3, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health Sciences University and the Portland Veterans Administration Medical Center, OR 97201, USA, 1999.
12. Herron DM, Marohn M. A consensus document on robotic surgery. Surgical endoscopy 2008; 22(2): 313-325.
13. Liu A, Tendick F, Cleary K, et al. A survey of surgical simulation: applications, technology, and education. Presence Teleoperat Virtual Environ 2003; 12(6): 599-614.
14. Duchene DA, Moinzadeh A, Gill IS, et al. Survey of residency training in laparoscopic and robotic surgery. J Urol 2006; 176(5): 2158-2166, discussion 2167.
15. Gobern JM, Novak CM, Lockrow EG. Survey of robotic surgery training in obstetrics and gynecology residency. J Minim Invas Gynecol 2011; 18(6): 755-760.
16. Cleary K. Medical robotics and the operating room of the future. Conference Proceedings of the International Conference of IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, vol. 7, 2005; 7250-7253.
17. Tzemanaki A, Dogramadzi S, Pipe T, et al. Towards an anthropomorphic design of minimally invasive instrumentation for soft tissue robotic surgery. In Advances in Autonomous Robotics. Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012; 455-456.
18. Simorov A, Otte RS, Kopietz CM, et al. Review of surgical robotics user interface: what is the best way to control robotic surgery? Surg Endosc 2012; 26(8): 2117-2125.
19. Dipietro L, Sabatini AM, Dario P. A survey of glove-based systems and their applications. IEEE Systems, Man and Cybernetics 2008; 38(4): 461-482.
20. Tzemanaki A, Gao X, Pipe T, et al. Hand exoskeleton for remote control of minimally invasive surgical anthropomorphic instrumentation. In Proceedings of the 6th Hamlyn Symposium on Medical Robotics. Imperial College, London: London, UK, 2013.
21. Boynton PM. Administering, analysing, and reporting your questionnaire. Br Med J 2004; 328(7452): 1372-1375.
22. Boynton PM, Greenhalgh T. Selecting, designing, and developing your questionnaire. Br Med J 2004; 328(7451): 1292-1295.
23. Walonick DS. A Selection from Survival Statistics. StatPac Inc.: Bloomington, MN, 2010.
24. Krippendorff K. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage 2004.
25. Mayring P. Qualitative Content Analysis [28 paragraphs]. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, vol. 1(2). 2000.
26. Zhang C, Robb B, Waters J, et al. Incidence of incisional hernias increase with single port laparoscopic technique, 2012; http://www.sages.org/imagelibrary/details.php?id=103803
27. Paul S, McCulloch P, Sedrakyan A. Robotic surgery: revisiting no innovation without evaluation. Br Med J 2013; 346: f1573. doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f1573 (Published 11 March 2013).
28. Ho M, Desai JP. Towards the development of a SMA-actuated MRI-compatible tendon-driven neurosurgical robot. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation 2012; 683-688.
29. Walters P, McGoran D. Digital fabrication of smart structures and mechanisms - creative applications in art and design. In IS&T Digital Fabrication, Minneapolis, 2011.
30. Madhani AJ, Niemeyer G, Salisbury JKJ. The Black Falcon: a teleoperated surgical instrument for minimally invasive surgery. In IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 1998; vol. 2; 936-944.
31. Marcus HJ, Hallet AH, Candy TP, et al. Electronic response to S. Paul et al., Robotic surgery: revisiting no innovation without evaluation. Br Med J 2013; 346: f1573; http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f1573?tab=responses (accessed 10 April 2013).
32. Heijnsdijk EAM, Dankelman J, Gouma DJ. Effectiveness of grasping and duration of clamping using laparoscopic graspers. Surg Endosc 2002; 16(9): 1329-1331.