Analysis of executional and procedural errors in dry‐lab robotic surgery experiments

Background Analysing kinematic and video data can help identify potentially erroneous motions that lead to sub‐optimal surgeon performance and safety‐critical events in robot‐assisted surgery. Methods We develop a rubric for identifying task and gesture‐specific executional and procedural errors and...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery 2022-06, Vol.18 (3), p.e2375-n/a
Main Authors: Hutchinson, Kay, Li, Zongyu, Cantrell, Leigh A., Schenkman, Noah S., Alemzadeh, Homa
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
computer‐assisted surgery
Error analysis
Error detection
Kinematics
minimal invasive surgery
MIS
Original
Parameter identification
Robotic surgery
safety
training
Trajectory analysis
Video data
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background Analysing kinematic and video data can help identify potentially erroneous motions that lead to sub‐optimal surgeon performance and safety‐critical events in robot‐assisted surgery. Methods We develop a rubric for identifying task and gesture‐specific executional and procedural errors and evaluate dry‐lab demonstrations of suturing and needle passing tasks from the JIGSAWS dataset. We characterise erroneous parts of demonstrations by labelling video data, and use distribution similarity analysis and trajectory averaging on kinematic data to identify parameters that distinguish erroneous gestures. Results Executional error frequency varies by task and gesture, and correlates with skill level. Some predominant error modes in each gesture are distinguishable by analysing error‐specific kinematic parameters. Procedural errors could lead to lower performance scores and increased demonstration times but also depend on surgical style. Conclusions This study provides insights into context‐dependent errors that can be used to design automated error detection mechanisms and improve training and skill assessment.
ISSN:1478-5951
1478-596X
DOI:10.1002/rcs.2375