Virtual Reality Coupled with Adapted Physical Interface for a Better Evaluation of the Innovative Surgical Instrument

  • Duy Minh Phan Nguyen
  • Jérôme Tonetti
  • Guillaume Thomann
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Production Engineering book series (LNPE)

Abstract

In the domain of designing innovative products in the medical field, investigations are often oriented towards communication between actors and needs comprehension. In the DESTIN (DEsign of Surgical/Technological INnovation) project, User Centered Design methodology with concrete experiments is applied. Researchers propose emulations in an operating room for co-evaluation of innovative products and new adapted surgical procedures. In this paper, they intend to evaluate the usage of the product in a virtual environment using a 3D haptic feedback system. Researchers not only propose a better ergonomic situation of the physician in front of the operating screen, but also increase the performance of the simulator in order to allow the manipulation of the innovative surgical instrument developed. We used virtual reality environment and the manufactured prototype with the aim to validate the new surgical procedure and the innovative designed surgical instrument.

Keywords

Virtual Reality 3D-Haptic feedback system Prototyping User Centered Design (UCD) Minimally Invasive Surgery 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Melton, G.B.: Biomedical and health informatics for surgery. Advanced Surgery 44, 117–130 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    NF EN ISO 9241-210: ‘Human-centred Design Processes for Interactive Systems’ Genève, Switzerland, International Organization for Standardization (January 2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jokela, T.: Making user-centred design common sense: striving for an unambiguous and communicative UCD process model. In: Proceedings of the Second Nordic Conference on Human Computer Interaction, Aarhus, Denmark. ACM Press (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guiatni, M., Riboulet, V., Kheddar, A.: Design and Evaluation of a Haptic Interface for Interactive Simulation of Minimally-Invasive Surgeries. In: IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, Suntec Convention and Exhibition Center, Singapore, July 14-17 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Saupin, G., Duriez, C., Cotin, S.: Contact Model for Haptic Medical Simulations. In: Bello, F., Edwards, E. (eds.) ISBMS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5104, pp. 157–165. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zarrad, W., Poignet, P., Cortesão, R., Company, O.: Stability and Transparency Analysis of a Haptic Feedback Controller for Medical Applications. In: Proceedings of the 46th IEEE, Conference on Decision and Control, New Orleans, LA, USA, December 12-14 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mizokamit, R., Abet, N., Kinoshitatt, Y., He, S.: Simulation of ICSI Procedure Using Virtual Haptic Feedback Model. In: 2007 IEEE/ICME International Conference on Complex Medical Engineering (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Matern, U., Waller, P., Giebmeyer, C., Rückauer, K.D., Farthmann, E.H.: Ergonomics: requirements for adjusting the height of laparoscopic operating tables. JSLS: Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 5, 7–12 (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burgess-Limerick, R., Mon-Williams, M., Coppard, V.L.: Visual display height. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42(1), 140–150 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jaschinski, W., Heuer, H., Kylian, H.: Preferred position of visual displays relative to the eyes: a field study of visual strain and individual differences. Ergonomics 41(7), 1034–1049 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Turville, K.L., Psihogios, J.P., Ulmer, T.R., Mirka, G.A.: The effects of video display terminal height on the operator: a comparison of the 15°and 40° recommendations. Applied Ergonomics 29(4), 239–246 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Van Veelen, M.A., Kazemier, G., Koopman, J., Goossens, R.H., Miejer, D.W.: Assessment of the ergonomically optimal operating surface height for laparoscopic surgery. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques 12(1), 47–52 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaur, G.: Role of OT Table Height on the Task Performance of Minimal Access Surgery World. Journal of Laparoscopic Surgery 1(1), 49–55 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Van Veelen, M.A.: Human-Product Interaction in Minimally Invasive Surgery: A Design Vision for Innovative Products, pp. 92–97. Delft University of Technology, Delft (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Matern, U., Waller, P.: Instruments for minimally invasive surgery. Surgical Endoscopy 13(2), 174–182 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Duy Minh Phan Nguyen
    • 1
  • Jérôme Tonetti
    • 2
  • Guillaume Thomann
    • 1
  1. 1.G-SCOP LaboratoryGrenoble Institute of TechnologyGrenobleFrance
  2. 2.Orthopaedic and Traumatology CentreMichallon HospitalGrenobleFrance

Personalised recommendations