Surgeons performing robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery experience physical stress and overuse of shoulder muscles due to sub-optimal arm support during surgery. The objective is to present a novel design and prototype of a dynamic arm support for robotic laparoscopic surgery to evaluate its ergonomics and performance on the AdLap-VR simulation training device. The prototype was designed using the mechanical engineering design process: Technical requirements, concept creation, concept selection, 3D-design and built of the prototype. A crossover study was performed on a marble sorting task on the AdLap-VR. The first group performed four trials without the arm support, followed by four trials with the arm support, and the other group executed the sequence vice versa. The performance parameters used were time to complete (s), path length (mm), and the number of collisions. Afterward, the participants filled out a questionnaire on the ergonomic experience regarding both situations. 20 students executed 160 performed trials on the AdLap-VR Significant decreases in the subjective comfort parameters mental demand, physical demand, effort and frustration were observed as a result of introducing the novel arm support. Significant decreases in the objective performance parameters path length and the number of collisions were also observed during the tests. The newly developed dynamic arm support was found to improve comfort and enhance performance through increased stability on the robotic surgery skills simulator AdLap-VR.

Collision feedback about instrument and environment interaction is often lacking in robotic surgery training devices. The PoLaRS virtual reality simulator is a newly developed desk trainer that overcomes drawbacks of existing robot trainers for advanced laparoscopy. This study aimed to assess the effect of haptic and visual feedback during training on the performance of a robotic surgical task. Robotic surgery-naïve participants were randomized and equally divided into two training groups: Haptic and Visual Feedback (HVF) and No Haptic and Visual Feedback. Participants performed two basic virtual reality training tasks on the PoLaRS system as a pre- and post-test. The measurement parameters Time, Tip-to-tip distance, Path length Left/Right and Collisions Left/Right were used to analyze the learning curves and statistically compare the pre- and post-tests performances. In total, 198 trials performed by 22 participants were included. The visual and haptic feedback did not negatively influence the time to complete the tasks. Although no improvement in skill was observed between pre- and post-tests, the mean rank of the number of collisions of the right grasper (dominant hand) was significantly lower in the HVF feedback group during the second post-test (Mean Rank = 8.73 versus Mean Rank = 14.27, U = 30.00, p = 0.045). Haptic and visual feedback during the training on the PoLaRS system resulted in fewer instrument collisions. These results warrant the introduction of haptic feedback in subjects with no experience in robotic surgery. The PoLaRS system can be utilized to remotely optimize instrument handling before commencing robotic surgery in the operating room.

Introduction: Robot-assisted surgery is often performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. However, this technique requires a different set of technical skills and surgeons are expected to alternate between these approaches. The aim of this study is to investigate the crossover effects when switching between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery. Methods: An international multicentre crossover study was conducted. Trainees with distinctly different levels of experience were divided into three groups (novice, intermediate, expert). Each trainee performed six trials of a standardized suturing task using a laparoscopic box trainer and six trials using the da Vinci surgical robot. Both systems were equipped with the ForceSense system, measuring five force-based parameters for objective assessment of tissue handling skills. Statistical comparison was done between the sixth and seventh trial to identify transition effects. Unexpected changes in parameter outcomes after the seventh trial were further investigated. Results: A total of 720 trials, performed by 60 participants, were analysed. The expert group increased their tissue handling forces with 46% (maximum impulse 11.5 N/s to 16.8 N/s, p = 0.05), when switching from robot-assisted surgery to laparoscopy. When switching from laparoscopy to robot-assisted surgery, intermediates and experts significantly decreased in motion efficiency (time (sec), resp. 68 vs. 100, p = 0.05, and 44 vs. 84, p = 0.05). Further investigation between the seventh and ninth trial showed that the intermediate group increased their force exertion with 78% (5.1 N vs. 9.1 N, p = 0.04), when switching to robot-assisted surgery. Conclusion: The crossover effects in technical skills between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery are highly depended on the prior experience with laparoscopic surgery. Where experts can alternate between approaches without impairment of technical skills, novices and intermediates should be aware of decay in efficiency of movement and tissue handling skills that could impact patient safety. Therefore, additional simulation training is advised to prevent from undesired events.

Introduction: Although robotic-assisted surgery is increasingly performed, objective assessment of technical skills is lacking. The aim of this study is to provide validity evidence for objective assessment of technical skills for robotic-assisted surgery. Methods: An international multicenter study was conducted with participants from the academic hospitals Heidelberg University Hospital (Germany, Heidelberg) and the Amsterdam University Medical Centers (The Netherlands, Amsterdam). Trainees with distinctly different levels of robotic surgery experience were divided into three groups (novice, intermediate, expert) and enrolled in a training curriculum. Each trainee performed six trials of a standardized suturing task using the da Vinci Surgical System. Using the ForceSense system, five force-based parameters were analyzed, for objective assessment of tissue handling skills. Mann–Whitney U test and linear regression were used to analyze performance differences and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test to analyze skills progression. Results: A total of 360 trials, performed by 60 participants, were analyzed. Significant differences between the novices, intermediates and experts were observed regarding the total completion time (41 s vs 29 s vs 22 s p = 0.003), mean non zero force (29 N vs 33 N vs 19 N p = 0.032), maximum impulse (40 Ns vs 31 Ns vs 20 Ns p = 0.001) and force volume (38 N³ vs 32 N³ vs 22 N³p = 0.018). Furthermore, the experts showed better results in mean non-zero force (22 N vs 13 N p = 0.015), maximum impulse (24 Ns vs 17 Ns p = 0.043) and force volume (25 N³ vs 16 N³p = 0.025) compared to the intermediates (p ≤ 0.05). Lastly, learning curve improvement was observed for the total task completion time, mean non-zero force, maximum impulse and force volume (p ≤ 0.05). Conclusion: Construct validity for force-based assessment of tissue handling skills in robot-assisted surgery is established. It is advised to incorporate objective assessment and feedback in robot-assisted surgery training programs to determine technical proficiency and, potentially, to prevent tissue trauma.

The complexity of handheld steerable laparoscopic instruments (SLI) may impair the learning curve compared to conventional instruments when first utilized. This study aimed to provide the current state of interest in the use of SLI, the current use of these in daily practice and the type of training which is conducted before using SLI in the operating room (OR) on real patients. An online survey was distributed by European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) Executive Office to all active members, between January 4th and February 3rd, 2020. The survey consisted of 14 questions regarding the usage and training of steerable laparoscopic instruments. A total of 83 members responded, coming from 33 different countries. Twenty three percent of the respondents using SLI, were using the instruments routinely and of these 21% had not received any formal training in advance of using the instruments in real patients. Of all responding EAES members, 41% considered the instruments to potentially compromise patient safety due to their complexity, learning curve and the inexperience of the surgeons. The respondents reported the three most important aspects of a possible steerable laparoscopic instruments training curriculum to be: hands-on training, safe tissue handling and suturing practice. Finally, a major part of the respondents consider force/pressure feedback data to be of significant importance for implementation of training and assessment of safe laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Training and assessment of skills regarding safe implementation of steerable laparoscopic instruments is lacking. The respondents stressed the need for specific hands-on training during which feedback and assessment of skills should be guaranteed before operating on real patients.