[PPT] - Performance of the Feedbacks Titolo presentazione Supervisor : Prof. PowerPoint Presentation

SLIDE 1

Titolo presentazione sottotitolo

Milano, XX mese 20XX

Evaluating the Dexterity of Surgical Instruments and Performance of the Feedbacks

Supervisor: Prof. Elena De Momi Co-supervisor: Prof. Sanja Dogramadzi Master Thesis of: Yavuz Gülfem Ceren, 892619

Academic Year 2019-2020

SLIDE 2

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Index

Introduction Aim of the Work Methods Results Conclusion & Future Developments

SLIDE 3

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Introduction: Application Scenario

SMARTsurg Project an advanced system for performing Robot Assisted MIS Objectives:

dexterous anthropomorphic surgical instruments
wearable hand exoskeleton to control the surgical instruments
wearable smart glasses for augmented reality and 3D reconstruction of the surgical

field.

SLIDE 4

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Introduction: Problems

Da Vinci tool which is used for robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery has disadvantages:
Limited number of degree of freedom
No complex movements
Not satisfied about the ergonomics of the current instruments
Manipulation of the instruments is not intuitive and requires extensive training

Limited Dexterity of Surgical Instruments

In the RAMIS, the surgeons are looking inside the body with a camera and generally, they cannot see what is

happening above.

To inform them about the borders of tissues or organs, the feedback should be given to the surgeon.
There is not much work on which type of feedback would be more usable and effective choice.

To Guide to the Surgeon

SLIDE 5

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Introduction: State of Art

Da Vinci Tool 3 Fingers Tool (designed by BRL)

SLIDE 6

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Aim of the Work

 Compare usability and performances of different surgical instruments  Compare usability and performances of different feedback types

Haptic Feedback Visual Feedback

SLIDE 7

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Methods: Build Virtual Reality

Peg Transfer Task

Aim is to compare usability of

surgical instruments

Buzz Wire Task

Aim is to compare performanceof

feedbacks

Virtual Tasks

SLIDE 8

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Methods: Peg Transfer

Main steps of this task: 1. Track movements of the fingers and hand 2. Design virtual environment 3. Control the surgical instruments in VR 4. Perform experiments 5. Collect results from experiments

SLIDE 9

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Methods: Peg Transfer

Components Virtual Environment

HTC Vive System was

installed.

Calibrations of data glove

and HTC Vive System were done.

In Unity, the virtual

environment was developed and game

bjects were designed.
The mapping between

data glove and instruments in Unity was done.

Picking up and dropping

functions were developed in Unity.

SLIDE 10

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Methods: Experimental Protocols

Fill the surveys Perform same task with 3 Fingers Perform peg trasnfer task with Da Vinci tool Practice with the system Wear the data Glove and HTC Headset Read,fill and sign the forms

For peg transfer task, 14 people are recruited:

2 surgeons
12 people who do not have medical skills

SLIDE 11

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Methods: Buzz Wire

Main steps of this task: 1. Design haptic device 2. Create virtual environment 3. Integrate the device into environment 4. Implement visual feedback 5. Perform experiments 6. Collect results

SLIDE 12

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Methods: Buzz Wire

Components

HTC Vive System

was installed.

Calibration of HTC

Vive System were done.

In Unity, the

virtual environment was developed and game objects were designed.

Haptic device was

designed and tested.

The interaction

between device and virtual environment was done.

Virtual feedback

was added into environment.

Virtual Environment

SLIDE 13

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Methods: Buzz Wire

a. The first message sent gives information about the frequency of vibration such as low or high 1. If the tool does not touch the wire which means that it is in the safe region, the message is “0” and nothing happens. 2. If the tool approaches the wire, the message is “1” and the piezo vibrate at 140Hz with frequently delays. (0.5 sec vibration + 0.5 sec no vibration) 3. If the tool touches the wire, the message is “2” and the piezo vibrate at 140Hz continuously. b. The second message sent gives information about the position.

In order to develop visual feedback, three spheres are added to the virtual environment around the tool:  When the tool is in a safe region, the spheres are green  When the tool approaches the wire (distance between the tool and wire is less than approaching limit) that they become yellow  The spheres finally turn red when the tool touches the wire which means that the distance between the tool and wire is less than touching limit

SLIDE 14

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Methods: Experimental Protocols

Read,fill and sign the forms Wear HTC headset and hold the HTC Vive Controller Practice with the system Perform buzz wire game with visual feedback Haptic device is placed to the user’s arm Perform same task with the haptic feedback Fill the surveys

For buzz wire task, 10 people were recruited:

2 surgeons
8 people who do not have medical skills

SLIDE 15

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Methods: Success Measure

Compare Surgical Instruments

Usability Score Task Load Score Time on Task

Compare Feedback Types

Usability Score Task Load Score Number of touching (number of errors) Time on Task

SLIDE 16

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Methods: Data Analysis

Quantitative Data

Duration of task Speed of task Number of Touching The distance between wire and loop

Qualitative Data

System Usability Scale NASA- Task Load Index

SUS is a standardized metric for measuring the usability of the system and consists of a 10 item questionnaire with five response options for respondents; from strongly agree to strongly disagree. A SUS score above a 68 would be considered above average and anything below 68 is below average. NASA-Task Load Index is a multidimensional scale designed to obtain workload estimates from the participant while he is performing a task. The NASA TLX consists of two parts evaluation procedure:

The first requirement is for each participant to evaluate

the contribution of each subscale to the workload of the

task. This value is called as its weight.
The second requirement is to obtain numerical ratings for

each scale that reflect the magnitude of that subscale in the task.

SLIDE 17

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619

Results: Surgical Instruments

According to Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test, there is a significant difference between Da Vinci tool and 3 Fingers tool.

88.0 76.0

Da Vinci Tool 3 Fingers Tool

Mean SUS Scores of Peg Transfer Task With 12 subjects

85.0 73.8

Da Vinci Tool 3 Fingers Tool

Mean SUS Scores of Peg Transfer Task With 2 surgeons

25.2 32.8

Da Vinci Tool 3 Fingers Tool

Mean NASA TLX Scores of Peg Transfer Task With 12 subjects

10.6 22.3

Da Vinci Tool 3 Fingers Tool

Mean NASA TLX Scores of Peg Transfer Task With 2 surgeons

2.6 3.4

Da Vinci Tool 3 Fingers Tool

Mean Duration of Peg Transfer Task [sec] With 12 subjects

2.7 3.5

Da Vinci Tool 3 Fingers Tool

Mean Duration of Peg Transfer Task [sec] With 2 surgeons

SLIDE 18

Gülfem Ceren YAVUZ, 892619