Faster acquisition of laparoscopic skills in virtual reality with haptic feedback and 3D vision

Hagelsteen, Kristine; Langegård, Anders; Lantz, Adam; Ekelund, Mikael; Anderberg, Magnus; Bergenfelz, Anders

doi:10.1080/13645706.2017.1305970

Cited by 35 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This work supports previous studies investigating the benefits of this technology and explains the disadvantages in detail, such as the hindrance experienced when using goggles, loss of concentration and headache [7,8,9,10]. Measurements were also taken from non-experts.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Additionally, higher precision and fewer mistakes are made [7,8,9]. To date, there have been a number of other studies investigating the advantages and disadvantages of using a 3D imaging system for conventional laparoscopy (LSC) [7,10,11,12]. Various study designs have been used, and most compare two different groups using either a 3D or 2-dimensional (2D) system for exercises on a pelvitrainer, or in vivo [9,10,11,12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To date, there have been a number of other studies investigating the advantages and disadvantages of using a 3D imaging system for conventional laparoscopy (LSC) [7,10,11,12]. Various study designs have been used, and most compare two different groups using either a 3D or 2-dimensional (2D) system for exercises on a pelvitrainer, or in vivo [9,10,11,12]. In our study, an objective comparison of 3D vs 2D LSC was carried out using a pelvitrainer with a variety of standardised exercises performed by laparoscopic experts, non-experts and medical students.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A laparoscopic study investigating 3D vs 2D imaging systems using a pelvitrainer model with experts, non-experts, and students

Zwimpfer

Lacher

Fellmann

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Vision is an essential element of laparoscopic surgery that defines the outcome of an operation in regards to time, mistakes and precision. A 3-dimensional (3D) perspective may improve vision during an operation. Therefore, this study was designed to compare 3D versus 2-dimensional (2D) perspectives using a pelvitrainer model. Methods Fifty subjects were divided into 3 categories based on different experience levels. The subjects were randomised into two groups, with each group performing the same 4 standardised tasks. Task completion time and the number of mistakes made for each task were recorded. After completing the tasks, participants answered questions concerning the two systems. Results Group A was, on average, 20% faster at all four tasks and made approximately 18% fewer mistakes in two of the tasks in comparison to group B. The experts significantly benefited from the 3D system in terms of accuracy compared to non-experts and students. The students demonstrated a significantly greater benefit from the 3D system when performing non-linear, continuous movements. Loss of concentration occurred at the same rate for subjects using the 2D and 3D systems. Nausea and dizziness were reported only when working with the 3D system. 91% found the 3D system advantageous for accomplishing the tasks. Conclusions Irrespective of experience level, 3D laparoscopy shows advantages in saving time, increasing accuracy and reducing mistakes. These benefits were also accompanied by subjective advantages that were noted by the participants. However, the more complex the task, the less significant the benefit of the 3D system.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A laparoscopic study investigating 3D vs 2D imaging systems using a pelvitrainer model with experts, non-experts, and students

Zwimpfer

Lacher

Fellmann

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is also immense theoretical knowledge instilled in the training process. Other virtual simulation systems can also give targeted feedback during training [27][28][29];…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Virtual versus Jaw Simulation in Oral Implant Education: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Zhang

Gao

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim We investigate the evaluation methods of teaching oral implant clinical courses and estimate the effectiveness of a virtual simulation platform. Methods Eighty second- and third-year undergraduates in Lanzhou University were recruited and randomized to either three experimental groups or one control group. The subjects undertook theoretical examinations to test their basic level of knowledge after training in similarly unified knowledge courses. Each student group then participated in an eight-hour operating training session. An operation test on pig mandible was conducted, followed by a second theoretical examination. The assessment consists of three distinct parts: a subjective operating score by a clinical senior teacher, an implant accuracy analysis in cone-beam computed tomography (angular, apical, and entrance deviation), and comparison of the two theoretical examinations. Finally, students completed a questionnaire gauging their understanding of the virtual simulation. Results There was no significant difference between the four groups in first theoretical examination (P>0.05); the second theoretical scores of the V-J and J-V group (62.90±3.70, 60.05±2.73) were significantly higher than the first time (57.05±3.92, P < 0.05), while no difference between the V(57.10±3.66) and J (56.89±2.67) groups was found. Thus, the combination of V-J was effective in improving students’ theoretical scores. The V-J and J-V groups had higher scores on operation (73.98±4.58; 71.85±4.67) and showed better implant precision.Conclusion Virtual simulation education, especially with a jaw simulation model, could improve students’ implantology achievements and training. We found that the V-J group performed better than the J-V group in oral implant teaching.

show abstract

“…There is also immense theoretical knowledge instilled in the training process. Other virtual simulation systems can also give targeted feedback during training [27][28][29], such sustained feedback will maximize the nal effect of virtual training [30].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Virtual versus Jaw Simulation in Oral Implant Education: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Zhang

Gao

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This research aims to investigate the evaluation methods of teaching oral implant clinical courses and estimate the effectiveness of a virtual simulation platform.Methods: Eighty second- and third-year undergraduates in Lanzhou University were recruited and randomized to either three experimental groups or one control group. The subjects undertook theoretical examinations to test their basic level of knowledge after training in similarly unified knowledge courses. Each student group then participated in an eight-hour operating training session. An operation test on pig mandible was conducted, followed by a second theoretical examination. The assessment consists of three distinct parts: a subjective operating score by a clinical senior teacher, an implant accuracy analysis in cone-beam computed tomography (angular, apical, and entrance deviation), and comparison of the two theoretical examinations. Finally, students completed a questionnaire gauging their understanding of the virtual simulation.Results: There was no significant difference between the four groups in first theoretical examination (P > 0.05); the second theoretical scores of the V-J and J-V group (62.90 ± 3.70, 60.05 ± 2.73) were significantly higher than the first time (57.05 ± 3.92, P < 0.05), while no difference between the V (57.10 ± 3.66) and J (56.89 ± 2.67) groups was found. Thus, the combination of V-J was effective in improving students’ theoretical scores. The V-J and J-V groups had higher scores on operation (73.98 ± 4.58; 71.85 ± 4.67) and showed better implant precision.Conclusion: Virtual simulation education, especially with a jaw simulation model, could improve students’ implantology achievements and training. Currently study found that the V-J group may performed better than the J-V group in oral implant teaching.

show abstract

Faster acquisition of laparoscopic skills in virtual reality with haptic feedback and 3D vision

Abstract: Laparoscopic training in virtual reality with 3D vision and haptic feedback made training more time efficient and did not negatively affect later video box-performance in 2D. [Formula: see text].

Cited by 35 publications

References 32 publications

A laparoscopic study investigating 3D vs 2D imaging systems using a pelvitrainer model with experts, non-experts, and students

A laparoscopic study investigating 3D vs 2D imaging systems using a pelvitrainer model with experts, non-experts, and students

Virtual versus Jaw Simulation in Oral Implant Education: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Virtual versus Jaw Simulation in Oral Implant Education: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About