Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
MP10-15 BUILDING A REAL-TIME FEEDBACK SYSTEM TO IMPROVE PERFORMANCE ON A ROBOTIC TISSUE DISSECTION TASK
0
Zitationen
8
Autoren
2022
Jahr
Abstract
You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 May 2022MP10-15 BUILDING A REAL-TIME FEEDBACK SYSTEM TO IMPROVE PERFORMANCE ON A ROBOTIC TISSUE DISSECTION TASK Jasper Laca, Rafal Kocielnik, Jessica H. Nguyen, Ryan Tsang, Jonathan You, Alvin Hui, Anima Anandkumar, and Andrew J. Hung Jasper LacaJasper Laca More articles by this author , Rafal KocielnikRafal Kocielnik More articles by this author , Jessica H. NguyenJessica H. Nguyen More articles by this author , Ryan TsangRyan Tsang More articles by this author , Jonathan YouJonathan You More articles by this author , Alvin HuiAlvin Hui More articles by this author , Anima AnandkumarAnima Anandkumar More articles by this author , and Andrew J. HungAndrew J. Hung More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002532.15AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: An automated error prevention system can potentially provide surgical trainees with optimal real-time feedback during training and live surgery. In this study, we determine efficacy of real-time feedback during a robotic dissection task. METHODS: 45 medical students (no surgical experience) completed 2 dissection tasks on a live daVinci Xi Surgical Robot (Fig. 1a). Videos were prospectively reviewed by 4 manual raters to identify surgical errors (e.g., fruit puncture) and technical skills, as measured by Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS). Following the 1st task, participants were stratified into control group (CG) or feedback group (FG). Feedback consisted of 8 pre-recorded audio phrases, manually triggered by a proctor when a corresponding error occurred. Feedback contained the following components: warning signal; identification of non-ideal behavior; proposed mitigation; longer-term impact (e.g., "Be cautious with how much force you are applying with your tools, be as gentle as possible when appropriate, otherwise you risk damaging the tissue."). Participants from each group were further labeled as under-performers (UP) or innate performers (IP), based on a median split of errors and GEARS from the 1st task. T-test and Mann-Whitney analysis were used to compare performance between groups. RESULTS: Raters achieved intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.84 & 0.81 for errors classification and GEARS, respectively (p<0.001). Initial performance, based on number of errors and GEARS, were comparable between CG (n=22) and FB (n=21) (median number of errors: 19.0 vs 19.5, p=0.93; GEARS score: 13.85 vs 14.06, p=0.82). During the 2nd task, FG had lower median error counts (6.5 vs 12.5, p<0.05) and higher GEARS score (18.24 vs.16.10, p=0.01). All IP exhibited similar improvements between the 1st and 2nd task, regardless of feedback (p=0.97) (Fig. 1b). On the other hand, UP in the FG performed significantly better than their CG counterparts during the 2nd task (p<0.01), suggesting that feedback was particularly valuable for UP. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time feedback can reduce surgical errors and improve robotic technical skills, especially for UP. Future research should look to expand real-time feedback by identifying relevant errors for feedback across different procedures and experience groups. Source of Funding: None © 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 207Issue Supplement 5May 2022Page: e152 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Jasper Laca More articles by this author Rafal Kocielnik More articles by this author Jessica H. Nguyen More articles by this author Ryan Tsang More articles by this author Jonathan You More articles by this author Alvin Hui More articles by this author Anima Anandkumar More articles by this author Andrew J. Hung More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.260 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.116 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 7.493 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.776 Zit.
Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2018 · 5.438 Zit.