Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Surgical robots assist with precision tasks in minimally invasive procedures. The surgeon controls the robot from a console away from the operating table, reducing the opportunity for face-to-face communication in an otherwise team-oriented environment. This study examined spatial communication in a collaborative surgical task. It was hypothesized that spatial communication aids would improve performance in the task despite subjects’ innate spatial ability. Fifteen novice dyads completed a simulated organ manipulation task using a laparoscopic trainer box with a rotated (90^o) camera view. Subjects were divided into 3 experimental groups: no aid, cardinal directions aid, and grid aid. A spatial ability test was also administered. Significant correlations were found between spatial ability, time, and communication volume in the no aid condition, an effect less apparent in the cardinal directions or grid aid conditions. These results suggest the benefit of a spatial communication aid to promote collaboration in robotic surgery.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ballantyne

G. H.

(2002). Robotic Surgery, Telerobotic Surgery, Telepresence, and Telementoring. Surgical Endoscopy, 16(10), 1389–1402.

Christian

C. K.

Gustafson

M. L.

Roth

E. M.

(2006). A Prospective Study of Patient Safety in the Operating Room. Surgery, 139(2), 159–173.

Clark

H.H.

Brennan

S.E.

(1991). Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 127–149.

Clark

H. H.

Wilkes-Gibbs

(1986). Referring as a Collaborative Process. Cognition, 22(1), 1–39.

Clark

H.H.

Marshall

C.E.

(1981). Elements of Discourse Understanding. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 10–63.

Cramton

C. D.

(2001). The Mutual Knowledge Problem and its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346–371.

Gawande

A. A.

Thomas

E. J.

Zinner

M. J.

(1999). The Incidence and Nature of Surgical Adverse Events in Colorado and Utah in 1992. Surgery, 126(1), 66–75.

Healey

Benn

(2009). Teamwork Enables Remote Surgical Control and a New Model for a Surgical System Emerges. Cognition, Technology & Work, 11(4), 255–265.

Healey

M. A.

Shackford

S. R.

Osler

T. M.

(2002). Complications in Surgical Patients. Arch Surg, 137(5), 611–618.

10.

Keehner

M. M.

Tendick

Meng

M. V.

Anwar

H. P.

Hegarty

Stoller

M. L.

Duh

(2004). Spatial ability, experience, and skill in laparoscopic surgery. The American Journal of Surgery, 188(1), 71–75.

11.

Kohn

Corrigan

Donaldson

(2000). To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

12.

Landrigan

C. P.

Parry

G. J.

Bones

C. B.

(2010). Temporal Trends in Rates of Patient Harm Resulting from Medical Care. The New England Journal of Medicine, 363(22), 2124–2134.

13.

Lee

Rafiq

Merrell

(2005). Ergonomics and Human Factors in Endoscopic Surgery: A Comparison of Manual vs Telerobotic Simulation Systems. Surgical Endoscopy, 19(8), 1064–1070.

14.

Lingard

Espin

Whyte

(2004). Communication Failures in the Operating Room: An Observational Classification of Recurrent Types and Effects. Qual.Saf.Health.Care, 13(5) 330–334.

15.

Nyssen

Blavier

(2010). Integrating Collective Work Aspects in the Design Process: An Analysis Case Study of the Robotic Surgery using Communication as a Sign of Fundamental Change. In Palanque

Vanderdonckt

Winckler

(Eds.) (18–27). Berlin: Springer.

16.

Risucci

Geiss

Gellman

Pinard

Rosser

(2001). Surgeon-specific factors in the acquisition of laparoscopic surgical skills. American Journal of Surgery, 181(4) 289–293.

17.

Stransky

Wilcox

L. M.

Dubrowski

(2010). Mental rotation: Cross-task training and generalization. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Applied, 16(4), 349–360.

18.

Williams

R. G.

Silverman

Schwind

(2007). Surgeon Information Transfer and Communication: Factors Affecting Quality and Efficiency of Inpatient Care. Annals of Surgery, 245(2), 159–169.

Spatial Communication in Robotic Surgery

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References