A computerized analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic task performance

Vimal K. Narula, William C. Watson, S. Scott Davis, Kristen Hinshaw, Bradley J. Needleman, Dean J. Mikami, Jeffrey W. Hazey, John H. Winston, P. Muscarella, Mike Rubin, Vipul Patel, W. Scott Melvin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

27 Scopus citations

Abstract

Introduction: Robotic technology has been postulated to improve performance in advanced surgical skills. We utilized a novel computerized assessment system to objectively describe the technical enhancement in task performance comparing robotic and laparoscopic instrumentation. Methods and procedures: Advanced laparoscopic surgeons (2-10 yrs experience) performed three unique task modules using laparoscopic and Telerobotic surgical instrumentation (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA). Performance was evaluated using a computerized assessment system (ProMIS, Dublin, Ireland) and results were recorded as time (s), path (mm) and precision. Each surgeon had an initial training session followed by two testing sessions for each module. A paired Student's t-test was used to analyze the data. Results: Ten surgeons completed the study. 8/10 surgeons had significant technical enhancement utilizing robotic technology. Conclusions: The ProMIS computerized assessment system can be modified to objectively obtain task performance data with robotic instrumentation. All the tasks were performed faster and with more precision using the robotic technology than standard laparoscopy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2258-2261
Number of pages4
JournalSurgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques
Volume21
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2007
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Human/robotic
  • Technical education instruments
  • Technical training/courses

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A computerized analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic task performance'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this