Cargando…
User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review
BACKGROUND: A variety of human computer interfaces are used by robotic surgical systems to control and actuate camera scopes during minimally invasive surgery. The purpose of this review is to examine the different user interfaces used in both commercial systems and research prototypes. METHODS: A c...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10234960/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36971815 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-09981-0 |
_version_ | 1785052610864087040 |
---|---|
author | Hamza, Hawa Baez, Victor M. Al-Ansari, Abdulla Becker, Aaron T. Navkar, Nikhil V. |
author_facet | Hamza, Hawa Baez, Victor M. Al-Ansari, Abdulla Becker, Aaron T. Navkar, Nikhil V. |
author_sort | Hamza, Hawa |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A variety of human computer interfaces are used by robotic surgical systems to control and actuate camera scopes during minimally invasive surgery. The purpose of this review is to examine the different user interfaces used in both commercial systems and research prototypes. METHODS: A comprehensive scoping review of scientific literature was conducted using PubMed and IEEE Xplore databases to identify user interfaces used in commercial products and research prototypes of robotic surgical systems and robotic scope holders. Papers related to actuated scopes with human–computer interfaces were included. Several aspects of user interfaces for scope manipulation in commercial and research systems were reviewed. RESULTS: Scope assistance was classified into robotic surgical systems (for multiple port, single port, and natural orifice) and robotic scope holders (for rigid, articulated, and flexible endoscopes). Benefits and drawbacks of control by different user interfaces such as foot, hand, voice, head, eye, and tool tracking were outlined. In the review, it was observed that hand control, with its familiarity and intuitiveness, is the most used interface in commercially available systems. Control by foot, head tracking, and tool tracking are increasingly used to address limitations, such as interruptions to surgical workflow, caused by using a hand interface. CONCLUSION: Integrating a combination of different user interfaces for scope manipulation may provide maximum benefit for the surgeons. However, smooth transition between interfaces might pose a challenge while combining controls. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-023-09981-0. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10234960 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102349602023-06-03 User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review Hamza, Hawa Baez, Victor M. Al-Ansari, Abdulla Becker, Aaron T. Navkar, Nikhil V. Surg Endosc Review Article BACKGROUND: A variety of human computer interfaces are used by robotic surgical systems to control and actuate camera scopes during minimally invasive surgery. The purpose of this review is to examine the different user interfaces used in both commercial systems and research prototypes. METHODS: A comprehensive scoping review of scientific literature was conducted using PubMed and IEEE Xplore databases to identify user interfaces used in commercial products and research prototypes of robotic surgical systems and robotic scope holders. Papers related to actuated scopes with human–computer interfaces were included. Several aspects of user interfaces for scope manipulation in commercial and research systems were reviewed. RESULTS: Scope assistance was classified into robotic surgical systems (for multiple port, single port, and natural orifice) and robotic scope holders (for rigid, articulated, and flexible endoscopes). Benefits and drawbacks of control by different user interfaces such as foot, hand, voice, head, eye, and tool tracking were outlined. In the review, it was observed that hand control, with its familiarity and intuitiveness, is the most used interface in commercially available systems. Control by foot, head tracking, and tool tracking are increasingly used to address limitations, such as interruptions to surgical workflow, caused by using a hand interface. CONCLUSION: Integrating a combination of different user interfaces for scope manipulation may provide maximum benefit for the surgeons. However, smooth transition between interfaces might pose a challenge while combining controls. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-023-09981-0. Springer US 2023-03-27 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10234960/ /pubmed/36971815 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-09981-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review Article Hamza, Hawa Baez, Victor M. Al-Ansari, Abdulla Becker, Aaron T. Navkar, Nikhil V. User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review |
title | User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review |
title_full | User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review |
title_fullStr | User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review |
title_full_unstemmed | User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review |
title_short | User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review |
title_sort | user interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10234960/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36971815 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-09981-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hamzahawa userinterfacesforactuatedscopemaneuveringinsurgicalsystemsascopingreview AT baezvictorm userinterfacesforactuatedscopemaneuveringinsurgicalsystemsascopingreview AT alansariabdulla userinterfacesforactuatedscopemaneuveringinsurgicalsystemsascopingreview AT beckeraaront userinterfacesforactuatedscopemaneuveringinsurgicalsystemsascopingreview AT navkarnikhilv userinterfacesforactuatedscopemaneuveringinsurgicalsystemsascopingreview |