Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review
Do you wish to request the book?
User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review
2023
Overview
BackgroundA 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.MethodsA 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.ResultsScope 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.ConclusionIntegrating 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.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
