Visual clues act as a substitute for haptic feedback in robotic surgery
Objective The lack of haptic feedback (HF) in robotic surgery is one of the major concerns of novice surgeons to that field. The superior visual appearances acquired during robotic surgery may give clues that make HF less important. Methods We surveyed 52 individuals on their perception of HF during...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Surgical endoscopy 2008-06, Vol.22 (6), p.1505-1508 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1508 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 1505 |
| container_title | Surgical endoscopy |
| container_volume | 22 |
| creator | Hagen, M. E. Meehan, J. J. Inan, I. Morel, P. |
| description | Objective
The lack of haptic feedback (HF) in robotic surgery is one of the major concerns of novice surgeons to that field. The superior visual appearances acquired during robotic surgery may give clues that make HF less important.
Methods
We surveyed 52 individuals on their perception of HF during robotic surgery. The first group of 34 surgically inexperienced people used the da Vinci robot for their first time (drylab). The second group included 8 laparoscopic surgeons with experience up to a fifth robotic operation. The third group included 10 surgical experts with substantial experience (150-650 robotic cases). Visual analog assessment was made of perception of HF, how much HF was missed, how much the absence of HF impaired the operators’ level of comfort. Robotic experts were asked if complications have occurred as a result of a lack of HF.
Results
Of the first group, 50% reported the perception of HF, as did 55% of the second group and 100% of the third group (difference between group 1 and group 3:
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00464-007-9683-0 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70742573</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1478319461</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c465t-61fe1e3f8e16b3b74624b24dcb4a5894a070186cee58a07415d3991492d6a3653</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEFLxDAQhYMouq7-AC8SBL1VZ5I0bY6y6CoseFGvIU1T7dpt16Q97L83ZRcXBE_zSL4383iEXCDcIkB2FwCEFEmUiZI5T-CATFBwljCG-SGZgOKQsEyJE3IawhIirjA9JieYQ4Y54oTM3-swmIbaZnCBGttTEwcNQxH6uh96R6vO00-z7mtLK-fKwtgvWrfUd0U3voXBfzi_OSNHlWmCO9_NKXl7fHidPSWLl_nz7H6RWCHTPpFYOXS8yh3KgheZkEwUTJS2ECbNlTCQAebSOpfmUQtMS64UCsVKabhM-ZTcbPeuffcdI_d6VQfrmsa0rhuCzqKJpRmP4NUfcNkNvo3ZNEOVMlAoI4RbyPouBO8qvfb1yviNRtBjxXpbsR7lWLGG6LncLR6KlSv3jl2nEbjeASZY01TetLYOvxwDrkDKLHJsy4X41cYS9wn_v_4DXiORWQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>219520916</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Visual clues act as a substitute for haptic feedback in robotic surgery</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Hagen, M. E. ; Meehan, J. J. ; Inan, I. ; Morel, P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hagen, M. E. ; Meehan, J. J. ; Inan, I. ; Morel, P.</creatorcontrib><description>Objective
The lack of haptic feedback (HF) in robotic surgery is one of the major concerns of novice surgeons to that field. The superior visual appearances acquired during robotic surgery may give clues that make HF less important.
Methods
We surveyed 52 individuals on their perception of HF during robotic surgery. The first group of 34 surgically inexperienced people used the da Vinci robot for their first time (drylab). The second group included 8 laparoscopic surgeons with experience up to a fifth robotic operation. The third group included 10 surgical experts with substantial experience (150-650 robotic cases). Visual analog assessment was made of perception of HF, how much HF was missed, how much the absence of HF impaired the operators’ level of comfort. Robotic experts were asked if complications have occurred as a result of a lack of HF.
Results
Of the first group, 50% reported the perception of HF, as did 55% of the second group and 100% of the third group (difference between group 1 and group 3:
p
< 0.05). The first group missed HF for 6.5; the second group for 4.3, and the third group for 4 (difference between groups 1 and 3:
p
< 0.05). The surgical experts claimed to have missed HF for 7.2 s when they first started robotic surgery (Difference to now:
p
< 0.05). The lack of HF caused discomfort for the first group of 4; for the second group of 4,4, and for the third group of 2,6. One complication was reported by the robotic experts as resulting from the lack of HF.
Conclusions
The data support the conclusion that even beginners quickly experience the perception of HF when performing robotic surgery. With more experience, perception of HF and the level of comfort with robotic surgery increases significantly. This perception of HF makes “real” HF less important and demonstrates that its importance is overestimated by novices in robotic surgery.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0930-2794</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-2218</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00464-007-9683-0</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18071811</identifier><identifier>CODEN: SUREEX</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Abdominal Surgery ; Adolescent ; Adult ; Biological and medical sciences ; Clinical Competence ; Digestive system. Abdomen ; Endoscopy ; Feedback ; Gastroenterology ; General aspects ; Gynecology ; Hepatology ; Humans ; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) ; Laparoscopy - standards ; Medical sciences ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Proctology ; Robotics - standards ; Surgery ; Surgery, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Suture Techniques - instrumentation ; Task Performance and Analysis</subject><ispartof>Surgical endoscopy, 2008-06, Vol.22 (6), p.1505-1508</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c465t-61fe1e3f8e16b3b74624b24dcb4a5894a070186cee58a07415d3991492d6a3653</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c465t-61fe1e3f8e16b3b74624b24dcb4a5894a070186cee58a07415d3991492d6a3653</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00464-007-9683-0$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00464-007-9683-0$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=20390667$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18071811$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hagen, M. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meehan, J. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inan, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morel, P.</creatorcontrib><title>Visual clues act as a substitute for haptic feedback in robotic surgery</title><title>Surgical endoscopy</title><addtitle>Surg Endosc</addtitle><addtitle>Surg Endosc</addtitle><description>Objective
The lack of haptic feedback (HF) in robotic surgery is one of the major concerns of novice surgeons to that field. The superior visual appearances acquired during robotic surgery may give clues that make HF less important.
Methods
We surveyed 52 individuals on their perception of HF during robotic surgery. The first group of 34 surgically inexperienced people used the da Vinci robot for their first time (drylab). The second group included 8 laparoscopic surgeons with experience up to a fifth robotic operation. The third group included 10 surgical experts with substantial experience (150-650 robotic cases). Visual analog assessment was made of perception of HF, how much HF was missed, how much the absence of HF impaired the operators’ level of comfort. Robotic experts were asked if complications have occurred as a result of a lack of HF.
Results
Of the first group, 50% reported the perception of HF, as did 55% of the second group and 100% of the third group (difference between group 1 and group 3:
p
< 0.05). The first group missed HF for 6.5; the second group for 4.3, and the third group for 4 (difference between groups 1 and 3:
p
< 0.05). The surgical experts claimed to have missed HF for 7.2 s when they first started robotic surgery (Difference to now:
p
< 0.05). The lack of HF caused discomfort for the first group of 4; for the second group of 4,4, and for the third group of 2,6. One complication was reported by the robotic experts as resulting from the lack of HF.
Conclusions
The data support the conclusion that even beginners quickly experience the perception of HF when performing robotic surgery. With more experience, perception of HF and the level of comfort with robotic surgery increases significantly. This perception of HF makes “real” HF less important and demonstrates that its importance is overestimated by novices in robotic surgery.</description><subject>Abdominal Surgery</subject><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Clinical Competence</subject><subject>Digestive system. Abdomen</subject><subject>Endoscopy</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Gastroenterology</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Gynecology</subject><subject>Hepatology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</subject><subject>Laparoscopy - standards</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Proctology</subject><subject>Robotics - standards</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgery, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Suture Techniques - instrumentation</subject><subject>Task Performance and Analysis</subject><issn>0930-2794</issn><issn>1432-2218</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kEFLxDAQhYMouq7-AC8SBL1VZ5I0bY6y6CoseFGvIU1T7dpt16Q97L83ZRcXBE_zSL4383iEXCDcIkB2FwCEFEmUiZI5T-CATFBwljCG-SGZgOKQsEyJE3IawhIirjA9JieYQ4Y54oTM3-swmIbaZnCBGttTEwcNQxH6uh96R6vO00-z7mtLK-fKwtgvWrfUd0U3voXBfzi_OSNHlWmCO9_NKXl7fHidPSWLl_nz7H6RWCHTPpFYOXS8yh3KgheZkEwUTJS2ECbNlTCQAebSOpfmUQtMS64UCsVKabhM-ZTcbPeuffcdI_d6VQfrmsa0rhuCzqKJpRmP4NUfcNkNvo3ZNEOVMlAoI4RbyPouBO8qvfb1yviNRtBjxXpbsR7lWLGG6LncLR6KlSv3jl2nEbjeASZY01TetLYOvxwDrkDKLHJsy4X41cYS9wn_v_4DXiORWQ</recordid><startdate>20080601</startdate><enddate>20080601</enddate><creator>Hagen, M. E.</creator><creator>Meehan, J. J.</creator><creator>Inan, I.</creator><creator>Morel, P.</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PJZUB</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PPXIY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20080601</creationdate><title>Visual clues act as a substitute for haptic feedback in robotic surgery</title><author>Hagen, M. E. ; Meehan, J. J. ; Inan, I. ; Morel, P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c465t-61fe1e3f8e16b3b74624b24dcb4a5894a070186cee58a07415d3991492d6a3653</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Abdominal Surgery</topic><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Clinical Competence</topic><topic>Digestive system. Abdomen</topic><topic>Endoscopy</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Gastroenterology</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Gynecology</topic><topic>Hepatology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</topic><topic>Laparoscopy - standards</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Proctology</topic><topic>Robotics - standards</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgery, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Suture Techniques - instrumentation</topic><topic>Task Performance and Analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hagen, M. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meehan, J. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inan, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morel, P.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Health & Nursing</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Surgical endoscopy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hagen, M. E.</au><au>Meehan, J. J.</au><au>Inan, I.</au><au>Morel, P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Visual clues act as a substitute for haptic feedback in robotic surgery</atitle><jtitle>Surgical endoscopy</jtitle><stitle>Surg Endosc</stitle><addtitle>Surg Endosc</addtitle><date>2008-06-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1505</spage><epage>1508</epage><pages>1505-1508</pages><issn>0930-2794</issn><eissn>1432-2218</eissn><coden>SUREEX</coden><abstract>Objective
The lack of haptic feedback (HF) in robotic surgery is one of the major concerns of novice surgeons to that field. The superior visual appearances acquired during robotic surgery may give clues that make HF less important.
Methods
We surveyed 52 individuals on their perception of HF during robotic surgery. The first group of 34 surgically inexperienced people used the da Vinci robot for their first time (drylab). The second group included 8 laparoscopic surgeons with experience up to a fifth robotic operation. The third group included 10 surgical experts with substantial experience (150-650 robotic cases). Visual analog assessment was made of perception of HF, how much HF was missed, how much the absence of HF impaired the operators’ level of comfort. Robotic experts were asked if complications have occurred as a result of a lack of HF.
Results
Of the first group, 50% reported the perception of HF, as did 55% of the second group and 100% of the third group (difference between group 1 and group 3:
p
< 0.05). The first group missed HF for 6.5; the second group for 4.3, and the third group for 4 (difference between groups 1 and 3:
p
< 0.05). The surgical experts claimed to have missed HF for 7.2 s when they first started robotic surgery (Difference to now:
p
< 0.05). The lack of HF caused discomfort for the first group of 4; for the second group of 4,4, and for the third group of 2,6. One complication was reported by the robotic experts as resulting from the lack of HF.
Conclusions
The data support the conclusion that even beginners quickly experience the perception of HF when performing robotic surgery. With more experience, perception of HF and the level of comfort with robotic surgery increases significantly. This perception of HF makes “real” HF less important and demonstrates that its importance is overestimated by novices in robotic surgery.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>18071811</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00464-007-9683-0</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0930-2794 |
| ispartof | Surgical endoscopy, 2008-06, Vol.22 (6), p.1505-1508 |
| issn | 0930-2794 1432-2218 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70742573 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Abdominal Surgery Adolescent Adult Biological and medical sciences Clinical Competence Digestive system. Abdomen Endoscopy Feedback Gastroenterology General aspects Gynecology Hepatology Humans Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) Laparoscopy - standards Medical sciences Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Proctology Robotics - standards Surgery Surgery, Computer-Assisted - methods Suture Techniques - instrumentation Task Performance and Analysis |
| title | Visual clues act as a substitute for haptic feedback in robotic surgery |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T18%3A12%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Visual%20clues%20act%20as%20a%20substitute%20for%20haptic%20feedback%20in%20robotic%20surgery&rft.jtitle=Surgical%20endoscopy&rft.au=Hagen,%20M.%20E.&rft.date=2008-06-01&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1505&rft.epage=1508&rft.pages=1505-1508&rft.issn=0930-2794&rft.eissn=1432-2218&rft.coden=SUREEX&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00464-007-9683-0&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1478319461%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=219520916&rft_id=info:pmid/18071811&rfr_iscdi=true |