Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36609924›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2023

Telestration with augmented reality improves surgical performance through gaze guidance.

Eleni Amelia Felinska, Thomas Ewald Fuchs, Alexandros Kogkas, Zi-Wei Chen, Benjamin Otto, Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski, Jens Petersen, Beat Peter Müller-Stich, George Mylonas, Felix Nickel

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Eleni Amelia FelinskaDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Thomas Ewald FuchsDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Alexandros KogkasHamlyn Centre for Robotic Surgery, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ, UK.
Zi-Wei ChenDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Benjamin OttoDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Karl-Friedrich KowalewskiDepartment of Urology and Urological Surgery, University Medical Center Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
Jens PetersenDepartment of Medical Image Computing, German Cancer Research Center, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Beat Peter Müller-StichDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
George MylonasHamlyn Centre for Robotic Surgery, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ, UK.
Felix NickelDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. felix.nickel@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID 0000-0001-6066-8238
Heidelberg University · DEImperial College London · GBGerman Cancer Research Center · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn minimally invasive surgery (MIS), trainees need to learn how to interpret the operative field displayed on the laparoscopic screen. Experts currently guide trainees mainly verbally during laparoscopic procedures. A newly developed telestration system with augmented reality (iSurgeon) allows the instructor to display hand gestures in real-time on the laparoscopic screen in augmented reality to provide visual expert guidance (telestration). This study analysed the effect of telestration guided instructions on gaze behaviour during MIS training.

methodsIn a randomized-controlled crossover study, 40 MIS naive medical students performed 8 laparoscopic tasks with telestration or with verbal instructions only. Pupil Core eye-tracking glasses were used to capture the instructor's and trainees' gazes. Gaze behaviour measures for tasks 1-7 were gaze latency, gaze convergence and collaborative gaze convergence. Performance measures included the number of errors in tasks 1-7 and trainee's ratings in structured and standardized performance scores in task 8 (ex vivo porcine laparoscopic cholecystectomy).

resultsThere was a significant improvement 1-7 on gaze latency [F(1,39) = 762.5, p < 0.01, η

conclusionsTelestration with augmented reality successfully improved surgical performance. The trainee's gaze behaviour was improved by reducing the time from instruction to fixation on targets and leading to a higher convergence of the instructor's and the trainee's gazes. Also, the convergence of trainee's gaze and target areas increased with telestration. This confirms augmented reality-based telestration works by means of gaze guidance in MIS and could be used to improve training outcomes.

Indexed as

Augmented RealityEducation, MedicalLearningAnimalsCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicClinical CompetenceCross-Over StudiesHumansLaparoscopyStudents, MedicalSwineAugmented realityEye trackingGaze GuidanceLaparoscopyMinimally invasive surgeryPatient SafetySurgical trainingTelestration

Identifiers

PMID36609924
PMCPMC10156835
OpenAlexW4313597771

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.