Markov modeling of minimally invasive surgery based on tool/tissue interaction and force/torque signatures for evaluating surgical skills

229Citations
Citations of this article
204Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The best method of training for laparoscopic surgical skills is controversial. Some advocate observation in the operating room, while others promote animal and simulated models or a combination of surgery-related tasks. A crucial process in surgical education is to evaluate the level of surgical skills. For laparoscopic surgery, skill evaluation is traditionally performed subjectively by experts grading a video of a procedure performed by a student. By its nature, this process uses fuzzy criteria. The objective of the current study was to develop and assess a skill scale using Markov models (MMs). Ten surgeons [five novice surgeons (NS); five expert surgeons (ES)] performed a cholecystectomy and Nissen fundoplication in a porcine model. An instrumented laparoscopic grasper equipped with a three-axis force/torque (F/T) sensor was used to measure the forces/torques at the hand/tool interface synchronized with a video of the tool operative maneuvers. A synthesis of frame-by-frame video analysis and a vector quantization algorithm, allowed to define F/T signatures associated with 14 different types of tool/tissue interactions. The magnitude of F/T applied by NS and ES were significantly different (p < 0.05) and varied based on the task being performed. High F/T magnitudes were applied by NS compared with ES while performing tissue manipulation and vise versa in tasks involved tissue dissection. From each step of the surgical procedures, two MMs were developed representing the performance of three surgeons out of the five in the ES and NS groups. The data obtained by the remaining two surgeons in each group were used for evaluating the performance scale. The final result was a surgical performance index which represented a ratio of statistical similarity between the examined surgeon's MM and the MM of NS and ES. The difference between the performance index value, for a surgeon under study, and the NS/ES boundary, indicated the level of expertise in the surgeon's own group. Using this index, 87.5% of the surgical procedures were correctly classified into the NS and ES groups. The 12.5% of the procedures that were misclassified were performed by the ES and classified as NS. However in these cases the performance index values were very close to the NS/ES boundary. Preliminary data suggest that a performance index based on MM and F/T signatures provides an objective means of distinguishing NS from ES. In addition, this methodology can be further applied to evaluate haptic virtual reality surgical simulators for improving realism in surgical education.

References Powered by Scopus

A Tutorial on Hidden Markov Models and Selected Applications in Speech Recognition

17165Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

An Introduction to the Application of the Theory of Probabilistic Functions of a Markov Process to Automatic Speech Recognition

634Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Development of a model for training and evaluation of laparoscopic skills

594Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Objective assessment of technical surgical skills

397Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Haptics in minimally invasive surgical simulation and training

299Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Towards automatic skill evaluation: Detection and segmentation of robot-assisted surgical motions

227Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rosen, J., Hannaford, B., Richards, C. G., & Sinanan, M. N. (2001). Markov modeling of minimally invasive surgery based on tool/tissue interaction and force/torque signatures for evaluating surgical skills. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 48(5), 579–591. https://doi.org/10.1109/10.918597

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 107

72%

Researcher 20

13%

Professor / Associate Prof. 19

13%

Lecturer / Post doc 3

2%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Engineering 79

53%

Computer Science 35

24%

Medicine and Dentistry 26

18%

Psychology 8

5%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free