Research Article | Open Access
Usability Assessment of Two Different Control Modes for the Master Console of a Laparoscopic Surgical Robot
The objective of this study is to evaluate potential interface control modes for a compact four-degree-of-freedom (4-DOF) surgical robot. The goal is to improve robot usability by incorporating a sophisticated haptics-capable interface. Two control modes were developed using a commercially available haptic joystick: (1) a virtually point-constrained interface providing an analog for constrained laparoscopic motion (3-DOF rotation and 1-DOF translation), and (2) an unconstrained Cartesian input interface mapping more directly to the surgical tool tip motions. Subjects (n = 5) successfully performed tissue identification and manipulation tasks in an animal model in point-constrained and unconstrained control modes, respectively, with speed roughly equal to that achieved in similar manual procedures, and without a steep learning curve. The robot control was evaluated through bench-top tests and a subsequent qualitative questionnaire (n = 15). The results suggest that the unconstrained control mode was preferred for both camera guidance and tool manipulations.
- Intuitive Surgical, Inc. da Vinci Surgical System, http://www.intuitivesurgical.com, Accessed November 2011.
- G. S. Guthart and J. K. Salisbury, “The Intuitive Telesurgery System: Overview and Application,” in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, vol. 1, pp. 618–621, 2000.
- H. J. Song, “The Docking of Robotic Arms in Robot-Assisted Endoscopic Thyroidectomy,” in Proc. MIRA 4th International Congress, 2009.
- EndoControl, EndoControl: ViKY Endoscope Positioner, http://www.endocontrol-medical.com/viky_ep.php, Accessed February 12, 2011.
- LapMan, LapMan, http://www.lapman.ch/robots.php, Accessed February 12, 2011.
- S. Thielmann, U. Seibold, R. Haslinger et al., “MICA - A New Generation of Versatile Instruments in Robotic Surgery,” in Proc. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, vol. 1, pp. 871–878, 2010.
- F. Li, L. Hu, S. Kuang, C. Yang, and T. Wang, “A 5-DOF Table-Mounted Surgical Robot,” in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, vol. 1, pp. 355–359, 2007.
- J. Ma and P. Berkelman, “Control Software Design of a Compact Laparoscopic Surgical Robot System,” in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, vol. 1, pp. 2345–2350, 2006.
- S. Y. Ko and D. S. Kwon, “A Surgical Knowledge Based Interaction Method for a Laparoscopic Assistant Robot,” in Proc. IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, vol. 1, pp. 313–318, 2004.
- D. P. Noonan, G. P. Mylonas, J. Shang, C. J. Payne, A. Darzi, and G. Z. Yang, “Gaze Contingent Control for an Articulated Mechatronic Laparoscope,” in Proc. 3rd IEEE RAS and EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, vol. 1, pp. 759–764, 2010.
- J. Rosen, J. D. Brown, M. Barreca, L. Chang, B. Hannaford, and M. Sinanan, “The Blue DRAGON - A System for Monitoring the Kinematics and Dynamics of Endoscopic Tools in Minimally Invasive Surgery for Objective Laparoscopic Skill Assessment,” in Proc. Medicine Meets Virtual Reality, vol. 85 of Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, pp. 412–418, 2002.
- K. Cleary, V. Watson, D. Lindisch et al., “Precision Placement of Instruments for Minimally Invasive Procedures using a ‘Needle Driver’ Robot,” International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1–9, 2005.
- J. M. Sabater, N. Garcia, C. Pérez, and J. M. Azorin, “Algorithm for Haptic Rendering of Reconstructed 3D Solid Organs,” International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, vol. 3, pp. 387–393, 2008.
- S. K. Kim, W. H. Shin, S. Y. Ko, J. Kim, and D. S. Kwon, “Design of a Compact 5-DOF Surgical Robot of a Spherical Mechanism: CURES,” in Proc. IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, vol. 1, pp. 990–995.
- N. Zemiti, T. Ortmaier, and G. Morel, “A New Robot for Force Control in Minimally Invasive Surgery,” in Proc. IEEE Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, vol. 4, pp. 3643–3648, 2004.
- M. Lum, D. Friedman, J. Rosen et al., “The RAVEN - Design and Validation of a Telesurgery System,” International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 28, no. 9, pp. 1183–1197.
- Immersion, Featured Haptic Products for Medical, http://www.immersion.com/markets/medical/products/index.html, Accessed February 15, 2011.
- Simulab, LapTrainer with SimuVision, http://www.simulab.com/product/surgery/laparoscopic/laptrainer-simuvision, Accessed February 15, 2011.
- GMV, InsightArthro, http://insightarthrovr.gmv.com/index_en.htm, Accessed February 15, 2011.
- J. Fernández-Lozano, J. M. Gómez-de-Gabriel, V. F. Muñoz et al., “Human-Machine Interface Evaluation in a Computer Assisted Surgical System,” in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, vol. 1, pp. 231–236.
- B. Andonovski, P. Ponsa, and A. Casals, “Towards the Development of a Haptics Guideline in Human-Robot Systems,” in Proc. 3rd International Conference on Human System Interaction, vol. 1, pp. 380–387, 2010.
- X. Zhang, D. Oleynikov, and C. A. Nelson, “Portable Tool Positioning Robot for Telesurgery,” in Proc. Medicine Meets Virtual Reality 17, vol. 142 of Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, pp. 438–443, 2009.
- X. Zhang and C. A. Nelson, “Kinematic Analysis and Optimization of a Novel Robot for Surgical Tool Manipulation,” ASME Journal of Medical Devices, vol. 2, no. 2:021003.1-021003.8, 2008.
- G. Sankaranarayanan, H. King, S. Y. Ko et al., “Portable Surgery Master Station for Mobile Robotic Telesurgery,” in Proc. ROBOCOMM, 2007.
- T. H. Massie and J. K. Salisbury, “The Phantom Haptic Interface: A Device for Probing Virtual Objects,” Proc. ASME Winter Annual Meeting, Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 295–299, 2005.
- Y. Kobayashi, Y. Tomono, Y. Sekiguchi et al., “A Surgical Robot with Vision Field Control for Single Port Endoscopic Surgery,” The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery, vol. 6, pp. 454–464, 2010.
- Hansen Medical, Sensei X Robotic Catheter System, http://www.hansenmedical.com/sensei, Accessed July 12, 2011.
- X. Zhang and C. A. Nelson, “On the Dynamic Modeling of a Bevel-Geared Surgical Robotic Mechanism,” ASME Journal of Medical Devices, vol. 4, no. 4: 041002.1-041002.11, 2010.
- R. Satava, A. Cuschieri, and J. Hamdorf, “Metrics for Objective Assessment,” Surgical Endoscopy, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 220–226, 2003.
- J. Huang, S. Payandeh, P. Doris, and I. Hajshirmohammadi, “Fuzzy Classification: Towards Evaluating Performance on a Surgical Simulator,” in Proc. Medicine Meets Virtual Reality 13, vol. 111 of Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, pp. 194–200, 2005.
- P. B. Nebot, Y. Jain, K. Haylett et al., “Comparison of Task Performance of the Camera-Holder Robots EndoAssist and Aesop,” Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Techn, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 334–338, 2003.
- Y. Yavuz, B. Ystgaard, E. Skogvoll et al., “A Comparative Experimental Study Evaluating the Performance of Surgical Robots Aesop and Endosista,” Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Techn, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 163–167, 2000.
- A. M. Derossis, G. M. Fried, M. Abrahamowicz, H. H. Sigman, J. S. Barkun, and J. L. Meakins, “Development of a Model for Training and Evaluation of Laparoscopic Skills,” The American Journal of Surgery, vol. 175, no. 6, pp. 482–487, 1998.
- C. A. Nelson, D. J. Miller, and D. Oleynikov, “Design Methodology for a Novel Multifunction Laparoscopic Tool: Engineering for Surgeons' Needs,” in Proc. Medicine Meets Virtual Reality 15, vol. 125 of Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, pp. 343–348, 2007.
Copyright © 2012 Hindawi Publishing Corporation. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.