Abstract
Background
Nonrigid environments such as the human colon present unique challenges for the navigator in maintaining spatial orientation. Conventional wisdom suggests that a navigational aid, similar to a map, that provides critical shape information would be useful. This article presents a design concept for a colonoscopy navigational aid and the results of an experiment conducted to evaluate the display for supporting navigation and spatial orientation in simulated colonoscopy.
Methods
A navigational aid was designed to present shape information in an augmented reality display. A total of 14 untrained subjects performed a colonoscopy procedure in rigid and nonrigid colon models, with and without the navigational aid display, in a Latin square design. Performance measures such as time, distance or efficiency of travel, and location and direction error were recorded, together with subjective measures of confidence and workload.
Results
The results showed that, unlike navigating in rigid environments, the subjects spent more time navigating in the nonrigid environment (p < 0.01) and traveled a longer total distance (p = 0.01). The navigational aid had no effect on performance, as compared with the no aid condition. However, subjective measures showed that the subjects were more confident about their determination of location and direction (p < 0.01). They also preferred having the aid during navigation.
Conclusion
A navigational aid or map that provides shape information does not seem to improve performance in colonoscopy. In fact, it may lead to a false sense of security about location and orientation in the colon. The value of a map for training purposes remains to be examined.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bond J (1999) Virtual colonoscopy-promising, but not ready for widespread use (editorial). N Engl J Med 341: 20
Brooker JC, Saunders BP, Shah SG, Williams CB (2000) A new variable-stiffness colonoscope makes colonoscopy easier: a randomized controlled trial. Gut 46: 801–805
Cao CGL (2001) Designing for spatial orientation in nonrigid endoscopic environments. Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, pp 1259–1263
Cao CGL, Milgram P (2000) Case studies of disorientation in minimally invasive surgery. Proceedings of 44th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society and XIVth Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association 4: 169–172
Carrozza MC, Arean A, Accoto D, Menciassi A, Dario P (2003) A SMA-actuated miniature pressure regulator for a miniature robot for colonoscopy. Sensors Actuators A 105: 119–131
Cirocco WC, Rusin LC (1996) Fluoroscopy: a valuable ally during difficult colonoscopy. Surg Endosc 10: 1080–1084
Cotton PB, William CB (1990) Practical gastrointestinal endoscopy. Blackwell Scientific Publications, London, UK pp 99–143
Hart SG, Staveland LE (1988) Development of NASA TLX: results of empirical and theoretical research. In: Hancock PA, Meshkati N (eds) Human mental workload. Elsevier, Holland pp 139–183
Iddan G, Meron G, Glukhovsky A, Swain P (2000) Wireless capsule endoscopy. Nature 405: 417
Lieberman DA, De Garmo PL, Fleischer DE, Eisen GM, Helfand M (2000) Patterns of endoscopy use in the United States. Gastroenterology 118: 619–624
Mahmood T, Darzi A (2004) The learning curve for a colonoscopy simulator in the absence of any feedback: no feedback, no learning. Surg Endosc 18: 1224–1230
Measurand, Inc. Retrieved xxxx at http://www.measurand.com. Cited 16 May 2006
Meron G (2000) The development of the swallowable video capsule (M2A). Gastrointest Endosc 6: 816–819
National Cancer Institute (2006) Colon and rectum: U.S. racial/ethnic cancer patterns. Retrieved May 15, 2006 at http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PRO/content/PRO_1_1_Cancer_Statistics_2006_Presentation.asp
National Cancer Institute of Canada (2006) 2006 Canadian Cancer Statistics. Retrieved May 15, 2006 at http://www.ncic.cancer.ca/ncic/internet/standard/0,3621,84658243_328386486__langId-en,00.html
Ng WS, Phee SJ, Seow C, Davies BL (2000) Development of a robotic colonoscope. Digest Endosc 12: 131–135
Saunders BP, Bell GD, Williams CB, Bladen JS, Anderson AP (1995) First clinical results with a real-time electronic imager as an aid to colonoscopy. Gut 36: 913–917
Shah SG, Saunders BP, Brooker JC, Williams CB (2000) Magnetic imaging of colonoscopy: an audit of looping, accuracy, and ancillary maneuvers. Gastrointest Endosc 52: 1–8
Sidhu R, Sanders DS, McAlindon ME (2006) Gastrointestinal capsule endoscopy: from tertiary centres to primary care. Br J Med 332: 528–531
Tsumura T, Torii A, Fujita S, Takeda J, Hikita H, Nishikawa H, Ochi J, Miura K (2003) Usefulness of oblique transparent cylinders in facilitating colonoscopy. Digest Endosc 15: 121–124
Tulga MK, Sheridan TB (1980) Dynamic decisions and workload in multitask supervisory control. IEEE Transact Systems Man Cybernetics 10: 217–232
Acknowledgments
Funding for this research was provided by the National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Institute for Robotics and Intelligent Systems/PRECARN, and a Tufts University Faculty Research Award. In-kind support was provided by Measurand, Inc., Pentax Canada, Pentax, Inc., and DASIE International. The writing of this article was made possible by support from the Tufts Mellon Award.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cao, C.G.L. Guiding navigation in colonoscopy. Surg Endosc 21, 480–484 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-006-9000-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-006-9000-3