CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 13Surgical Simulation and TrainingTeleoperation and Haptic SystemsRetinal and Macular Surgery

Human/robotic interaction: vision limits performance in simulated vitreoretinal surgery

Open access
de Smet, Marc D., de Jonge, Nicky, Iannetta, Danilo, Faridpooya, Koorosh, van Oosterhout, Eric, Naus, Gerrit, Meenink, Thijs C.M., Mura, Marco +1 more·2019·Acta Ophthalmologica
DOI 10.1111/aos.14003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: Compare accuracy and precision in XYZ of stationary and dynamic tasks performed by surgeons with and without the use of a tele‐operated robotic micromanipulator in a simulated vitreoretinal environment. The tasks were performed using a surgical microscope or while observing a video monitor. Method: Two experienced and two novice surgeons performed tracking and static tasks at a fixed depth with hand‐held instruments on a Preceyes Surgical System R0.4. Visualization was through a standard microscope or a video display. The distances between the instrument tip and the targets (in μm) determined tracking errors in accuracy and precision. Results: Using a microscope, dynamic or static accuracy and precision in XY (planar) movements were similar among test subjects. In Z (depth) movements, experience lead to more precision in both dynamic and static tasks (dynamic 35 ± 14 versus 60 ± 37 μm; static 27 ± 8 versus 36 ± 10 μm), and more accuracy in dynamic tasks (58 ± 35 versus 109 ± 79 μm). Robotic assistance improved both precision and accuracy in Z (1–3 ± 1 μm) in both groups. Using a video screen in combination with robotic assistance improved all performance measurements and reduced any differences due to experience. Conclusions: Robotics increases precision and accuracy, with greater benefit observed in less experienced surgeons. However, human control was a limiting factor in the achieved improvement. A major limitation was visualization of the target surface, in particular in depth. To maximize the benefit of robotic assistance, visualization must be optimized.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/aos.14003

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
de Smet, M. D., de Jonge, N., Iannetta, D., Faridpooya, K., van Oosterhout, E., Naus, G., Meenink, T. C. M., Mura, M., & Beelen, M. J.
Affiliations
  • Microinvasive Ocular Surgery Center (MIOS sa) Lausanne Switzerland
  • Preceyes BV Eindhoven the Netherlands
  • University of Rome Tor Vergata (IT)
  • Rotterdam Eye Hospital (NL)
  • Catherina Ziekenhuis Eindhoven the Netherlands
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Acta Ophthalmologica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-12-27
Volume
97
Issue
7
Pages
672-678
ISSN
  • 0001-639X (ISSN-L)
  • 1755-375X
  • 1755-3768
DOI
10.1111/aos.14003
OpenAlex
W2908218873
Cited by
13
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Acta Ophthalmologica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • TU/e Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) (submittedVersion)
  • IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Ferrara (University of Ferrara) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical Simulation and Training
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Teleoperation and Haptic Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal and Macular Surgery
Keywords
vitrectomy, teleoperation, surgeon experience, surgical visualization, operating microscope, video display, depth tracking, surgical simulation
MeSH terms
Clinical Competence, Education, Medical, Graduate, Humans, Ophthalmology, Retinal Diseases, Robotics, Video Recording, Reproducibility of Results, Telemedicine, Vitreoretinal Surgery

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review