An advanced simulator for orthopedic surgical training
- 388 Downloads
The purpose of creating the virtual reality (VR) simulator is to facilitate and supplement the training opportunities provided to orthopedic residents. The use of VR simulators has increased rapidly in the field of medical surgery for training purposes. This paper discusses the creation of the virtual surgical environment (VSE) for training residents in an orthopedic surgical process called less invasive stabilization system (LISS) surgery which is used to address fractures of the femur.
The overall methodology included first obtaining an understanding of the LISS plating process through interactions with expert orthopedic surgeons and developing the information centric models. The information centric models provided a structured basis to design and build the simulator. Subsequently, the haptic-based simulator was built. Finally, the learning assessments were conducted in a medical school.
The results from the learning assessments confirm the effectiveness of the VSE for teaching medical residents and students. The scope of the assessment was to ensure (1) the correctness and (2) the usefulness of the VSE. Out of 37 residents/students who participated in the test, 32 showed improvements in their understanding of the LISS plating surgical process. A majority of participants were satisfied with the use of teaching Avatars and haptic technology. A paired t test was conducted to test the statistical significance of the assessment data which showed that the data were statistically significant.
This paper demonstrates the usefulness of adopting information centric modeling approach in the design and development of the simulator. The assessment results underscore the potential of using VR-based simulators in medical education especially in orthopedic surgery.
KeywordsVirtual reality (VR) Orthopedic simulator LISS plating Surgery
We would like to acknowledge funding received from the National Science Foundation through Grant Number CNS 1257803 and the Interdisciplinary Planning Grant program from Oklahoma State University (Office of the Provost).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
J. Cecil, Avinash Gupta and Miguel Pirela-Cruz declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All human studies have been approved by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki, as revised in 2008 (5). This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.Peters TM, Linte CA, Moore J, Bainbridge D, Jones DL, Guiraudon GM (2008) Towards a medical virtual reality environment for minimally invasive cardiac surgery. In: International workshop on medical imaging and virtual reality. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–11Google Scholar
- 13.Shi Y, Xiong Y, Hua X, Tan K, Pan X (2015) Key techniques of haptic related computation in virtual liver surgery. In: 2015 8th international conference on biomedical engineering and informatics (BMEI). IEEE, pp 355–359Google Scholar
- 14.Yu L, Wang T, Wang W, Wang Z, Zhang B (2013) A geometric modeling method based on OpenGL in virtual gallbladder surgery. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on computer science and electronics engineering. Atlantis PressGoogle Scholar
- 16.Berlage T, Schmitgen A, Schmitz C, Welz A (2001) Simulation and planning of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass surgery. In: International congress series vol 1230. Elsevier, pp 68–72Google Scholar
- 17.Park JW, hoi J, Park Y, Sun K (2011) Haptic virtual fixture for robotic cardiac catheter navigation. Artif Organs 35(11):1127–1131. ISSN 0160-564XGoogle Scholar
- 22.Nahvi A, Moghaddam M, Arbabtafti M, Mahvash M, Richardson B (2016) Virtual bone surgery using a haptic robot. Int J Robot Theory Appl 1(1):1–12Google Scholar
- 23.Seah TET, Barrow A, Baskaradas A, Gupte C, Bello F (2014) A virtual reality system to train image guided placement of kirschner-wires for distal radius fractures. In: International symposium on biomedical simulation. Springer, pp 20–29Google Scholar
- 24.Tsai MD, Liu CS, Liu HY, Hsieh MS, Tsai FC (2011) Virtual reality facial contouring surgery simulator based on CT transversal slices. In: 2011 5th international conference on bioinformatics and biomedical engineering (ICBBE). IEEE, pp 1–4Google Scholar
- 27.Bayonat S, García M, Mendoza C, Ferniindez JM (2006) Shoulder arthroscopy training system with force feedback. In: International conference on medical information visualisation-biomedical visualisation (MedVis’ 06). IEEE, pp 71–76Google Scholar
- 31.Morris D, Sewell C, Blevins N, Barbagli F, Salisbury K (2004) A collaborative virtual environment for the simulation of temporal bone surgery. In: International conference on medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention. Springer, Berlin, pp 319–327Google Scholar
- 34.Morris D, Tan H, Barbagli F, Chang T, Salisbury K (2007) Haptic feedback enhances force skill learning. In: EuroHaptics conference, 2007 and symposium on haptic interfaces for virtual environment and teleoperator systems. World Haptics 2007. Second Joint. IEEE, pp 21–26Google Scholar
- 37.Jalote-Parmar A, Badke-Schaub P (2008) Workflow integration matrix: a framework to support the development of surgical information systems. Des Stud 29(4):338–368Google Scholar
- 38.Jannin P (2013) Surgical process modeling: methods and applications. In: Presentation at the 2013 medicine meets virtual reality conference (NEXTMED/ MMVR20), Feb 20–23. San DiegoGoogle Scholar
- 39.Nemani A, Sankaranarayan G, Roberts K, Panait L, Cao, C, De S (2013) Hierarchical task analysis of hybrid rigid scope natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) Cholecystectomy Procedures. In: Proceedings of the 2013 medicine meets virtual reality conference (NEXTMED/ MMVR20), Feb 20-23, San Diego, pp 293–297Google Scholar
- 40.Cecil J, Ramanathan P, Prakash A, Pirela-Cruz M (2013) Collaborative virtual environments for orthopedic surgery. In: Proceedings of the 9th annual IEEE international conference on automation science and engineering (IEEE CASE 2013), Aug 17–21, MadisonGoogle Scholar
- 41.Cecil J, Avinash G, Miguel PC, Rajkumar M, Ramanathan P (2016) A virtual reality based simulation environment for orthopedic surgery, Industry Case Studies Program, OTM, Oct 24–28, Rhodes, GreeceGoogle Scholar
- 43.Cecil J (2015) Modeling the process of creating virtual prototypes. Comput Aided Des Appl 6(1–4):1–4Google Scholar
- 44.IDEF methods. http://www.idef.com/
- 45.The systems modeling language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_Modeling_Language
- 46.Class diagrams. https://www.visual-paradigm.com/VPGallery/diagrams/Class.html
- 48.Abdurazik A, Offutt J (2000) Using UML collaboration diagrams for static checking and test generation. In: International conference on the unified modeling language. Springer, Berlin, pp 383–395Google Scholar
- 49.Cecil J, Pirela-Cruz M (2010) Development of an information model for a virtual surgical environment. In: Proceedings of the TMCE 2010, Apr 12–16, Ancona, ItalyGoogle Scholar
- 50.Cecil J, Pirela-Cruz M (2013) An information model for designing virtual environments for orthopedic surgery. In: Proceedings of the 2013 EI2N workshop, OTM workshops, Graz, Austria. Vol 8186, Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, pp 218-227Google Scholar
- 51.SYNTHES (2000) Less invasive stabilization system (LISS). http://www.synthes.com
- 52.Class diagrams. https://www.visual-paradigm.com/VPGallery/diagrams/Class.html
- 53.Sequence diagrams. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequence_diagram
- 54.NASA TLX test. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA-TLX
- 55.Nielsen J (2012) “Usability 101: introduction to usability”. Nielsen Norman Group. Retrieved 7 Aug 2016Google Scholar
- 56.Tergas AI, Sheth SB, Green IC, Giuntoli RL (2013) A pilot study of surgical training using a virtual robotic surgery simulator. JSLS J Soc Laparoendosc Surg 17(2):219Google Scholar
- 58.Howells NR, Gill HS, Carr AJ, Price AJ, Rees JL (2008) Transferring simulated arthroscopic skills to the operating theatre. Bone Joint J 90(4):494–499Google Scholar