On the effectiveness of virtual reality-based training for surgical robot setup

References

• Anthes C, Garca-Hernández RJ, Wiedemann M, Kranzlmüller D. 2016. State of the art of virtual reality technology. In: 2016 IEEE Aerospace Conference. Big Sky, MT: IEEE. p. 1–19.
   Google Scholar
• Berthet-Rayne P, Gras G, Leibrandt K, Wisanuvej P, Schmitz A, Seneci CA, Yang GZ. 2018. The i 2 snake robotic platform for endoscopic surgery. Ann Biomed Eng. 46(10):1663–1675. doi:10.1007/s10439-018-2066-y.
   Google Scholar
• Burke-Smalley L, Hutchins H. 2007. Training transfer: an integrative literature review. Hum Resour Dev Rev. 6:263–296. doi:10.1177/1534484307303035.
   Google Scholar
• Carlsen CG, Lindorff-Larsen K, Funch-Jensen P, Lund L, Morcke AM, Ipsen M, Charles P. 2014. Is current surgical training efficient? A national survey. J Surg Educ. 71(3):367–374. doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.10.002.
   Google Scholar
• Cecil J, Kumar MBR, Gupta A, Pirela-Cruz M, Chan-Tin E, Yu J. 2016. Development of a virtual reality based simulation environment for orthopedic surgical training. In: OTM Confederated International Conferences” On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems”. Rhodes, Greece: Springer. p. 206–214.
   Google Scholar
• Esteban J, Simson W, Witzig SR, Rienmüller A, Virga S, Frisch B, Zettinig O, Sakara D, Ryang YM, Navab N, et al. 2018. Robotic ultrasound-guided facet joint insertion. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 13(6):895–904. doi:10.1007/s11548-018-1759-x.
   Google Scholar
• Fotouhi J, Song T, Mehrfard A, Taylor G, Wang Q, Xian F, Martin-Gomez A, Fuerst B, Armand M, Unberath M, et al. 2020. Reflective-ar display: an interaction methodology for virtual-to-real alignment in medical robotics. IEEE Robotics Autom Lett. 5(2):2722–2729. doi:10.1109/LRA.2020.2972831.
   Google Scholar
• Freina L, Ott M. 2015. A literature review on immersive virtual reality in education: state of the art and perspectives. In: The International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education; vol. 1. “Carol I” National Defence University. Bucharest, Romania. p. 133.
   Google Scholar
• Gist ME, Schwoerer C, Rosen B. 1989. Effects of alternative training methods on self-efficacy and performance in computer software training. J Appl Psychol. 74(6):884. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.6.884.
   Google Scholar
• Grantcharov TP, Kristiansen V, Bendix J, Bardram L, Rosenberg J, Funch-Jensen P. 2004. Randomized clinical trial of virtual reality simulation for laparoscopic skills training. Br J Surg. 91(2):146–150. doi:10.1002/bjs.4407.
   Google Scholar
• Green CA, Chern H, O’Sullivan PS. 2018. Current robotic curricula for surgery residents: a need for additional cognitive and psychomotor focus. Am J Surg. 215(2):277–281. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.09.040.
   Google Scholar
• Hemal AK, Eun D, Tewari A, Menon M. 2004. Nuances in the optimum placement of ports in pelvic and upper urinary tract surgery using the da vinci robot. Urologic Clinics. 31(4):683–692.
   Google Scholar
• Hogle N, Chang L, Strong V, Welcome A, Sinaan M, Bailey R, Fowler D. 2009. Validation of laparoscopic surgical skills training outside the operating room: a long road. Surg Endosc. 23(7):1476–1482. doi:10.1007/s00464-009-0379-5.
   Google Scholar
• Iranmanesh P, Morel P, Wagner O, Inan I, Pugin F, Hagen M. 2010. Set-up and docking of the da vinci® surgical system: prospective analysis of initial experience. Int J Med Rob + Comput Assisted Surg MRCAS. 6:57–60. doi:10.1002/rcs.288.
   Google Scholar
• Kaluschke M, Weller R, Zachmann G, Pelliccia L, Lorenz M, Klimant P, Knopp S, Atze JP, Móckel F. 2018. Hips-a virtual reality hip prosthesis implantation simulator. In: 2018 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). Reutlingen, Germany: IEEE. p. 591–592.
   Google Scholar
• Kojcev R, Fuerst B, Zettinig O, Fotouhi J, Lee SC, Frisch B, Taylor R, Sinibaldi E, Navab N. 2016. Dual-robot ultrasound-guided needle placement: closing the planning-imaging-action loop. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 11(6):1173–1181. doi:10.1007/s11548-016-1408-1.
   Google Scholar
• Larsen CR, Soerensen JL, Grantcharov TP, Dalsgaard T, Schouenborg L, Ottosen C, Schroeder TV, Ottesen BS. 2009. Effect of virtual reality training on laparoscopic surgery: randomised controlled trial. Bmj. 338:b1802. doi:10.1136/bmj.b1802.
   Google Scholar
• Lehmann KS, Ritz JP, Maass H, Çakmak HK, Kuehnapfel UG, Germer CT, Bretthauer G, Buhr HJ. 2005. A prospective randomized study to test the transfer of basic psychomotor skills from virtual reality to physical reality in a comparable training setting. Ann Surg. 241(3):442. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000154552.89886.91.
   Google Scholar
• Lerner M, Ayalew M, Peine W, Sundaram C. 2010. Does training on a virtual reality robotic simulator improve performance on the da vinci (r) surgical system? J Endourology/Endourological Soc. 24:467–472. doi:10.1089/end.2009.0190.
   Google Scholar
• Liu H, Kinoshita T, Tonouchi A, Kaito A, Tokunaga M. 2019. What are the reasons for a longer operation time in robotic gastrectomy than in laparoscopic gastrectomy for stomach cancer? Surg Endosc. 33(1):192–198. doi:10.1007/s00464-018-6294-x.
   Google Scholar
• Mehrfard A, Fotouhi J, Taylor G, Forster T, Navab N, Fuerst B. 2019. A comparative analysis of virtual reality head-mounted display systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:191202913.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks R, Perlman A, Barak R. 2013. Construction safety training using immersive virtual reality. Constr Manage Econ. 31(9):1005–1017. doi:10.1080/01446193.2013.828844.
   Google Scholar
• Sethi AS, Peine WJ, Mohammadi Y, Sundaram CP. 2009. Validation of a novel virtual reality robotic simulator. J Endourol. 23(3):503–508. doi:10.1089/end.2008.0250.
   Google Scholar
• Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, O’brien MK, Bansal VK, Andersen DK, Satava RM. 2002. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg. 236(4):458. doi:10.1097/00000658-200210000-00008.
   Google Scholar
• Stajkovic A, Luthans F. 1998. Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 124:240–261. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.240.
   Google Scholar
• Tannenbaum S, Mathieu J, Salas E, Cannon-Bowers J. 1991. Meeting trainees’ expectations: the influence of training fulfillment on the development of commitment, self-efficacy, and motivation. J Appl Psychol. 76:759–769. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.76.6.759.
   Google Scholar
• Våpenstad C, Hofstad EF, Bø LE, Kuhry E, Johnsen G, Mårvik R, Langø T, Hernes TN. 2017. Lack of transfer of skills after virtual reality simulator training with haptic feedback. Minimally Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 26(6):346–354. doi:10.1080/13645706.2017.1319866.
   Google Scholar
• Westebring-van der Putten EP, Goossens RH, Jakimowicz JJ, Dankelman J. 2008. Haptics in minimally invasive surgery–a review. Minimally Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 17(1):3–16. doi:10.1080/13645700701820242.
   Google Scholar
• Xin B, Chen G, Wang Y, Bai G, Gao X, Chu J, Xiao J, Liu T. 2019. The efficacy of immersive virtual reality surgical simulator training for pedicle screw placement: a randomized double-blind controlled trial. World Neurosurg. 124:e324–e330. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.12.090.
   Google Scholar