Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 4/2007

Open Access 01-04-2007

Augmented versus Virtual Reality Laparoscopic Simulation: What Is the Difference?

A Comparison of the ProMIS Augmented Reality Laparoscopic Simulator versus LapSim Virtual Reality Laparoscopic Simulator

Authors: Sanne M.B.I. Botden, MSc, Sonja N. Buzink, MSc, Marlies P. Schijven, MD, PhD, Jack J. Jakimowicz, MD, PhD

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 4/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Virtual reality (VR) is an emerging new modality for laparoscopic skills training; however, most simulators lack realistic haptic feedback. Augmented reality (AR) is a new laparoscopic simulation system offering a combination of physical objects and VR simulation. Laparoscopic instruments are used within an hybrid mannequin on tissue or objects while using video tracking. This study was designed to assess the difference in realism, haptic feedback, and didactic value between AR and VR laparoscopic simulation.

Methods

The ProMIS AR and LapSim VR simulators were used in this study. The participants performed a basic skills task and a suturing task on both simulators, after which they filled out a questionnaire about their demographics and their opinion of both simulators scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The participants were allotted to 3 groups depending on their experience: experts, intermediates and novices. Significant differences were calculated with the paired t-test.

Results

There was general consensus in all groups that the ProMIS AR laparoscopic simulator is more realistic than the LapSim VR laparoscopic simulator in both the basic skills task (mean 4.22 resp. 2.18, P < 0.000) as well as the suturing task (mean 4.15 resp. 1.85, P < 0.000). The ProMIS is regarded as having better haptic feedback (mean 3.92 resp. 1.92, P < 0.000) and as being more useful for training surgical residents (mean 4.51 resp. 2.94, P < 0.000).

Conclusions

In comparison with the VR simulator, the AR laparoscopic simulator was regarded by all participants as a better simulator for laparoscopic skills training on all tested features.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Hance J, Aggarwal R, Undre S, et al. Evaluation of a laparoscopic video trainer with in-built measures of performance. JSLS 2004;8:S51 Hance J, Aggarwal R, Undre S, et al. Evaluation of a laparoscopic video trainer with in-built measures of performance. JSLS 2004;8:S51
2.
go back to reference Van Sickle KR. Construct validation of the ProMIS simulator using a novel laparoscopic suturing task. Surg Endosc 2005;19:1227–1231PubMedCrossRef Van Sickle KR. Construct validation of the ProMIS simulator using a novel laparoscopic suturing task. Surg Endosc 2005;19:1227–1231PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Grantcharov TP, Kristiansen VB, Bendix J, et al. Randomized clinical trail of virtual reality simulation for laparoscopic skills training. Br J Surg 2004;91:146–150PubMedCrossRef Grantcharov TP, Kristiansen VB, Bendix J, et al. Randomized clinical trail of virtual reality simulation for laparoscopic skills training. Br J Surg 2004;91:146–150PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Seymour N, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, et al. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg 236:458–463 Seymour N, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, et al. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg 236:458–463
5.
go back to reference Roberts KE, Bell RL, Duffy AJ. Evolution of surgical skills training. World J Gastroenterol 2006;28, 12(20):3219–3224 Roberts KE, Bell RL, Duffy AJ. Evolution of surgical skills training. World J Gastroenterol 2006;28, 12(20):3219–3224
6.
go back to reference Jakimowicz JJ, Cuschieri A. Time for evidence-based minimal access surgery training: Simulate or sink. Surg Endosc 2005;19:1521–1522PubMedCrossRef Jakimowicz JJ, Cuschieri A. Time for evidence-based minimal access surgery training: Simulate or sink. Surg Endosc 2005;19:1521–1522PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Carter FJ, Schijven MP, Aggerwal R, Grantcharow T, Francis NK, Hanna GB. Consensus guidelines for validation of virtual reality surgical simulators. Surg Endosc 2005;19:1523–1532PubMedCrossRef Carter FJ, Schijven MP, Aggerwal R, Grantcharow T, Francis NK, Hanna GB. Consensus guidelines for validation of virtual reality surgical simulators. Surg Endosc 2005;19:1523–1532PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Duffy AJ, Hogle NJ, McCarthy H, et al. Construct validity for the LAPSIM laparoscopic surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 2005;19:401–405PubMedCrossRef Duffy AJ, Hogle NJ, McCarthy H, et al. Construct validity for the LAPSIM laparoscopic surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 2005;19:401–405PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Tomulescu V, Popescu I. The use of LapSim virtual reality simulator in the evaluation of laparoscopic surgery skill. Preliminary results. Chirurgia (Bucur) 2004;99(6):523–527 Tomulescu V, Popescu I. The use of LapSim virtual reality simulator in the evaluation of laparoscopic surgery skill. Preliminary results. Chirurgia (Bucur) 2004;99(6):523–527
10.
go back to reference Ro CY, Toumpoulis IK, Ashton RC Jr, et al. The LapSim: a learning environment for both experts and novices. Stud Health Technol Inform 2005;111:414–417PubMed Ro CY, Toumpoulis IK, Ashton RC Jr, et al. The LapSim: a learning environment for both experts and novices. Stud Health Technol Inform 2005;111:414–417PubMed
11.
go back to reference Madan AK, Frantzides CT, Tebbit C. Quiros RM Participants’ opinions of laparoscopic training devices after a basic laparoscopic training course. Am J Surg 2005;189(6):758–761PubMedCrossRef Madan AK, Frantzides CT, Tebbit C. Quiros RM Participants’ opinions of laparoscopic training devices after a basic laparoscopic training course. Am J Surg 2005;189(6):758–761PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Lamata P, Gómez EJ, Sánchez-Margallo FM, et al. Study of laparoscopic forces perception for defining simulation fidelity. Stud Health Technol Inform 2005;119:288–292 Lamata P, Gómez EJ, Sánchez-Margallo FM, et al. Study of laparoscopic forces perception for defining simulation fidelity. Stud Health Technol Inform 2005;119:288–292
13.
go back to reference Kim HK, Rattner DW, Srinivasan MA. Virtual-reality-based laparoscopic surgical training: the role of simulation fidelity in haptic feedback. Comput Aided Surg 2004;9(5):227–234PubMedCrossRef Kim HK, Rattner DW, Srinivasan MA. Virtual-reality-based laparoscopic surgical training: the role of simulation fidelity in haptic feedback. Comput Aided Surg 2004;9(5):227–234PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Maass H, Chantier BB, Cakmak HK, et al. Fundamentals of force feedback and application to a surgery simulator. Comput Aided Surg 2003;8(6):283–291PubMed Maass H, Chantier BB, Cakmak HK, et al. Fundamentals of force feedback and application to a surgery simulator. Comput Aided Surg 2003;8(6):283–291PubMed
15.
go back to reference Schijven M, Jakimowicz J. Face-, expert- and referent validity of the Xitact LS500 Laparoscopy simulator. Surg Endosc 2002;16:1764–1770PubMedCrossRef Schijven M, Jakimowicz J. Face-, expert- and referent validity of the Xitact LS500 Laparoscopy simulator. Surg Endosc 2002;16:1764–1770PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Broe D, Ridgway PF, Johnson S, et al. Construct validation of a novel hybrid surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 2006;20(6):900–904PubMedCrossRef Broe D, Ridgway PF, Johnson S, et al. Construct validation of a novel hybrid surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 2006;20(6):900–904PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Woodrum D, Andreatta P, Yellamanchilli R, Feryus L, Gauger P, Minter RM. Construct validity of the LapSim laparoscopic surgical simulator. Am J Surg 2006;191(1):28–32PubMedCrossRef Woodrum D, Andreatta P, Yellamanchilli R, Feryus L, Gauger P, Minter RM. Construct validity of the LapSim laparoscopic surgical simulator. Am J Surg 2006;191(1):28–32PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Eriksen JR, Grantcharov T. Objective assessment of laparoscopic skills using a virtual reality stimulator. Surg Endosc 2005;19(9):1216–1219PubMedCrossRef Eriksen JR, Grantcharov T. Objective assessment of laparoscopic skills using a virtual reality stimulator. Surg Endosc 2005;19(9):1216–1219PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Sherman V, Feldman LS, Stanbridge D, Kazmi R, Fried GM. Assessing the learning curve for the acquisition of laparoscopic skills on a virtual reality simulator. Surg Endosc 2005;19(5):678–682PubMedCrossRef Sherman V, Feldman LS, Stanbridge D, Kazmi R, Fried GM. Assessing the learning curve for the acquisition of laparoscopic skills on a virtual reality simulator. Surg Endosc 2005;19(5):678–682PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Augmented versus Virtual Reality Laparoscopic Simulation: What Is the Difference?
A Comparison of the ProMIS Augmented Reality Laparoscopic Simulator versus LapSim Virtual Reality Laparoscopic Simulator
Authors
Sanne M.B.I. Botden, MSc
Sonja N. Buzink, MSc
Marlies P. Schijven, MD, PhD
Jack J. Jakimowicz, MD, PhD
Publication date
01-04-2007
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 4/2007
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-006-0724-y

Other articles of this Issue 4/2007

World Journal of Surgery 4/2007 Go to the issue