Robotic surgery: will it be evidence-based or just "toys for boys"?

The document attached has been archived with permission from the editor of the Medical Journal of Australia. An external link to the publisher’s copy is included.Guy J Madder

Do Basic Psychomotor Skills Transfer Between Different Image-based Procedures?

Background - Surgical techniques that draw from multiple types of image-based procedures (IBP) are increasing, such as Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery, fusing laparoscopy and flexible endoscopy. However, little is known about the relation between psychomotor skills for performing different types of IBP. For example, do basic psychomotor colonoscopy and laparoscopy skills interact? Methods - Following a cross-over study design, 29 naïve endoscopists were trained on the Simbionix GI Mentor and the SimSurgery SEP simulators. Group C (n = 15) commenced with a laparoscopy session, followed by four colonoscopy sessions and a second laparoscopy session. Group L (n = 14) started with a colonoscopy session, followed by four laparoscopy sessions and a second colonoscopy session. Results - No significant differences were found between the performances of group L and group C in their first training sessions on either technique. With additional colonoscopy training, group C outperformed group L in the second laparoscopy training session on the camera navigation task. Conclusions - Overall, training in the basic colonoscopy tasks does not affect performance of basic laparoscopy tasks (and vice versa). However, to limited extent, training of basic psychomotor skills for colonoscopy do appear to contribute to the performance of angled laparoscope navigation tasks. Thus, training and assessment of IBP typespecific skills should focus on each type of tasks independently. Future research should further investigate the influence of psychometric abilities on the performance of IBP and the transfer of skills for physicians who are experienced in one IBP type and would like to become proficient in another type of IBP.Industrial DesignIndustrial Design Engineerin

Surgical Simulator Design and Development

With the introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), it became necessary to develop training methods to learn skills outside the operating room. Several training simulators have become commercially available, but fundamental research into the requirements for effective and efficient training in MIS is still lacking. Three aspects of developing a training program are investigated here: what should be trained, how it should be trained, and how to assess the results of training. In addition, studies are presented that have investigated the role of force feedback in surgical simulators. Training should be adapted to the level of behavior: skill-based, rule-based, or knowledge-based. These levels can be used to design and structure a training program. Extra motivation for training can be created by assessment. During MIS, force feedback is reduced owing to friction in the laparoscopic instruments and within the trocar. The friction characteristics vary largely among instruments and trocars. When force feedback is incorporated into training, it should include the large variation in force feedback properties as well. Training different levels of behavior requires different training methods. Although force feedback is reduced during MIS, it is needed for tissue manipulation, and therefore force application should be trained as well

Retracting and seeking movements during laparoscopic goal-oriented movements. Is the shortest path length optimal?

Aims- Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) requires a high degree of eye–hand coordination from the surgeon. To facilitate the learning process, objective assessment systems based on analysis of the instruments’ motion are being developed. To investigate the influence of performance on motion characteristics, we examined goaloriented movements in a box trainer. In general, goal-oriented movements consist of a retracting and a seeking phase, and are, however, not performed via the shortest path length. Therefore, we hypothesized that the shortest path is not an optimal concept in MIS. Methods-Participants were divided into three groups (experts, residents, and novices). Each participant performed a number of one-hand positioning tasks in a box trainer. Movements of the instrument were recorded with the TrEndo tracking system. The movement from point A to B was divided into two phases: A-M (retracting) and M-B (seeking). Normalized path lengths (given in %) of the two phases were compared. Results- Thirty eight participants contributed. For the retracting phase, we found no significant difference between experts [median (range) %: 152 (129–178)], residents [164 (126–250)], and novices [168 (136–268)]. In the seeking phase, we find a significant difference (<0.001) between experts [180 (172–247)], residents [201 (163–287)], and novices [290 (244–469)]. Moreover, within each group, a significant difference between retracting and seeking phases was observed. Conclusions- Goal-oriented movements in MIS can be split into two phases: retracting and seeking. Novices are less effective than experts and residents in the seeking phase. Therefore, the seeking phase is characteristic of performance differences. Furthermore, the retracting phase is essential, because it improves safety by avoiding intermediate tissue contact. Therefore, the shortest path length, as presently used during the assessment of basic MIS skills, may be not a proper concept for analyzing optimal movements and, therefore, needs to be revised.Biomechanical EngineeringMechanical, Maritime and Materials Engineerin