ArticleBiomedical engineering letters2025
Speech-mediated manipulation of da Vinci surgical system for continuous surgical flow.
Article in Biomedical engineering letters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the advent of robot-assisted surgery, user-friendly technologies have been applied to the da Vinci surgical system (dVSS), and their efficacy has been validated in worldwide surgical fields. However, further improvements are required to the traditional manipulation methods, which cannot control an endoscope and surgical instruments simultaneously. This study proposes a speech recognition control interface (SRCI) for controlling the endoscope via speech commands while manipulating surgical instruments to replace the traditional method. The usability-focused comparisons of the newly proposed SRCI-based and the traditional manipulation method were conducted based on ISO 9241-11. 20 surgeons and 18 novices evaluated both manipulation methods through the line tracking task (LTT) and sea spike pod task (SSPT). After the tasks, they responded to the globally reliable questionnaires: after-scenario questionnaire (ASQ), system usability scale (SUS), and NASA task load index (TLX). The completion times in the LTT and SSPT using the proposed method were 44.72% and 26.59% respectively less than the traditional method, which shows statistically significant differences ( Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13534-024-00429-5.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.