Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of haptic feedback in laparoscopic surgery skill acquisition

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The benefits of haptic feedback in laparoscopic surgery training simulators is a topic of debate in the literature. It is hypothesized that novice surgeons may not benefit from the haptic information, especially during the initial phase of learning a new task. Therefore, provision of haptic feedback to novice trainees in the early stage of training may be distracting and detrimental to learning. A controlled experiment was conducted to examine the effect of haptic feedback on the learning curve of a complex laparoscopic suturing and knot-tying task.

Methods

The ProMIS and the MIST-VR surgical simulators were used to represent conditions with and without haptic feedback, respectively. A total of 20 novice subjects (10 per simulator) were trained to perform suturing and knot-tying and practiced the tasks in 18 sessions of 1 h each.

Results

At the end of the 3-week training period, the subjects performed equally fast but more consistently with haptics (ProMIS) than without haptics (MIST-VR). The subjects showed a slightly higher learning rate and reached the first plateau of the learning curve earlier with haptic feedback.

Conclusion

In general, learning with haptic feedback was significantly better than learning without it for a laparoscopic suturing and knot-tying task, but only during the first 5 h of training. Haptic feedback may not be warranted in laparoscopic surgical trainers. The benefits of a shorter time to the first performance plateau and more consistent initial performance should be balanced with the cost of implementing haptic feedback in surgical simulators.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Picod G, Jambon AC, Vinatier D, Dubois P (2005) What can the operator actually feel when performing a laparoscopy? Surg Endosc 19:95–100

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Perreault JO, Cao CGL (2006) Effects of vision and friction on haptic perception. Hum Factors 48:574–586

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, O’Brien MK, Bansal VK, Anderson DK, Satava RM (2002) Virtual reality training improves operating room performance. Ann Surg 236:458–464

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sutherland LM, Middleton PF, Anthony A, Hamdorf J, Cregan P, Scott D, Maddern GJ (2006) Surgical simulation: a systematic review. Ann Surg 243:291–300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Grantcharov TP, Kristiansen VB, Bendix J, Bardram L, Rosenberg J, Funch-Jensen P (2004) Randomized clinical trial of virtual reality simulation for laparoscopic skills training. Br J Surg 91:146–150

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lathan CE, Tracey MR, Sebrechts MM, Clawson DM, Higgins GA (2002) Using virtual environments as training simulators: measuring transfer. In: Stanney KM (ed) Handbook of virtual environments: design Implementation and applications. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 414–434

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lamb GD (1983) Tactile discrimination of textured surfaces: psychophysical performance measurements in humans. J Physiol London 338:551–565

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lederman SJ (1981) The perception of surface roughness by active and passive touch. Bull Psychonomic Soc 18:253–255

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lederman SJ (1983) Tactual roughness perception: spatial and temporal determinants. Can J Psychol 37:498–511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Srinivasan M, LaMotte R (1996) Tactual discrimination of softness: abilities and mechanisms. In: Franzen O, Johansson R, Terenius L (eds) Somesthesis and the neurobiology of the somatosensory cortex. Birkhauser, Berlin, pp 123–136

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Lederman SJ, Klatzky RL (2004) Haptic identification of common objects: effects of constraining the manual exploration process. Percept Psychophys 66:618–628

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Klatzky RL, Lederman SJ, Hamilton CL, Grindley M, Swendsen RH (2003) Feeling textures through a probe: effects of probe and surface geometry and exploratory factors. Percept Psychophys 65:613–631

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Brydges R, Carnahan H, Dubrowski A (2005) Surface exploration using laparoscopic surgical instruments: the perception of surface roughness. Ergonomics 48:874–894

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Botden SMBI, Torab F, Buzink SN, Jakimowicz JJ (2007) The importance of haptic feedback in laparoscopic suturing training and the additive value of virtual reality simulation. Surg Endosc 22:1214–1222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kitagawa M, Dokko D, Okamura AM, Yuh DD (2005) Effect of sensory substitution on suture manipulation forces for robotic surgical systems. J Thorac Cardiov Surg 129:151–158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Moody L, Baber C, Arvanitis TN (2002) Objective surgical performance evaluation based on haptic feedback. Stud Health Technol Inform 85:304–310

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wagner CR, Stylopoulos N, Howe RD (2002) The role of force feedback in surgery: analysis of blunt dissection. In: Proceedings of the 10th Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systsem (HAPTICS’02), pp 68–74

  18. Strom P, Hedman L, Sarna L, Kjellin A, Wredmark T, Fellander-Tsai L (2006) Early exposure to haptic feedback enhances performance in surgical simulator training: a prospective randomized crossover study in surgical residents. Surg Endosc 20:1383–1388

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Smith CD, Farrell TM, McNatt SS, Metreveli RE (2001) Assessing laparoscopic manipulative skills. Am J Surg 181:547–550

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. O’Connor A, Schwaitzberg SD, Cao CGL (2007) How much feedback is necessary for learning to suture? Surg Endosc 22:1614–1619

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kothari SN, Kaplan BJ, DeMaria EJ, Broderick TJ, Merrell RC (2002) Training in laparoscopic suturing skills using a new computer-based virtual reality simulator (MIST-VR) provides results comparable to those with an established pelvic trainer system. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 12:167–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Gallagher AG, Satava RM (2002) Virtual reality as a metric for the assessment of laparoscopic psychomotor skills. Surg Endosc 16:1746–1752

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Pearson AM, Gallagher AG, Rosser JC, Satava RM (2002) Evaluation of structured and quantitative training methods for teaching intracorporeal knot tying. Surg Endosc 16:130–137

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Champion HR, Higgins GA (2000) Meta-analysis and planning for SIMTRAUMA: medical simulation for combat trauma. U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, Fort Detrick, MD

    Google Scholar 

  25. Cao CGL, Zhou M, Jones DB, Schwaitzberg SD (2007) Can surgeons think and operate with haptics at the same time? J Gastrointest Surg 11:1564–1569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hassan I, Maschuw K, Rothmund M, Koller M, Gerdes B (2006) Novices in surgery are the target group of a virtual reality training laboratory. Eur Surg Res 38:109–113

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Aggarwal R, Black SA, Hance JR, Darzi A, Cheshire NJW (2006) Virtual reality simulation training can improve inexperienced surgeons’ endovascular skills. Eur J Vasc Endovasc 31:588–593

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Konz S, Johnson S (2000) Work design industrial ergonomics. Holcomb Hathaway, Scottsdale

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by a National Science Foundation Career Award (IIS-0238284) and a Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Research Grant Award.

Disclosures

Dr. M. Zhou, and Ms. S. Tse, have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose. Dr. A. Derevianko has consulted with Elsevier, Inc. and the Medical Education Advisory Board. Dr. D. B. Jones has consulted with Stryker Endoscopy and Olympus; has performed research with Allergan, Coviden; and has received institutional training grants from Covidien and Ethicon Endosurgery. He has no conflicts of interest with this manuscript. Dr. S. D. Schwaitzberg has consulted for MMDI, Endocore, and Olympus, and has served on the advisory committee for MITI, Stryker, Surgiquest, Cambridge Endo, Neatstitch, and Acuity Bio. He has no conflicts of interest with this manuscript. Dr. C. G. L. Cao has consulted for St. Jude Medical. She has no conflicts of interest with this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mechanical Engineering Department, Tufts University, 200 College Avenue, Medford, MA, 02155, USA

    M. Zhou, S. Tse & C. G. L. Cao

  2. Minimally Invasive Surgery Division, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA

    A. Derevianko & D. B. Jones

  3. Surgery, Cambridge Health Alliance Hospital, Cambridge, MA, USA

    S. D. Schwaitzberg

Authors
  1. M. Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Tse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Derevianko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. D. B. Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. D. Schwaitzberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C. G. L. Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. G. L. Cao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zhou, M., Tse, S., Derevianko, A. et al. Effect of haptic feedback in laparoscopic surgery skill acquisition. Surg Endosc 26, 1128–1134 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-2011-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-2011-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation