The LEAP TM Gesture Interface Device and Take-Home Laparoscopic Simulators

Abstract

Aim. To assess the potential of the LEAP™ infrared motion tracking device to map laparoscopic instrument movement in a simulated environment. Simulator training is optimized when augmented by objective performance feedback. We explore the potential LEAP has to provide this in a way compatible with affordable take-home simulators. Method. LEAP and the previously validated InsTrac visual tracking tool mapped expert and novice performances of a standardized simulated laparoscopic task. Ability to distinguish between the 2 groups (construct validity) and correlation between techniques (concurrent validity) were the primary outcome measures. Results. Forty-three expert and 38 novice performances demonstrated significant differences in LEAP-derived metrics for instrument path distance (P < .001), speed (P = .002), acceleration (P < .001), motion smoothness (P < .001), and distance between the instruments (P = .019). Only instrument path distance demonstrated a correlation between LEAP and InsTrac tracking methods (novices: r = .663, P < .001; experts: r = .536, P < .001). Consistency of LEAP tracking was poor (average % time hands not tracked: 31.9%). Conclusion. The LEAP motion device is able to track the movement of hands using instruments in a laparoscopic box simulator. Construct validity is demonstrated by its ability to distinguish novice from expert performances. Only time and instrument path distance demonstrated concurrent validity with an existing tracking method however. A number of limitations to the tracking method used by LEAP have been identified. These need to be addressed before it can be considered an alternative to visual tracking for the delivery of objective performance metrics in take-home laparoscopic simulators.

Keywords

simulation surgical education business of surgery

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Gurusamy

Nagendran

Toon

Davidson

. Laparoscopic surgical box model training for surgical trainees with limited prior laparoscopic experience. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(3):CD010478.

Nagendran

Toon

Davidson

Gurusamy

. Laparoscopic surgical box model training for surgical trainees with no prior laparoscopic experience. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(1):CD010479.

Zendejas

Brydges

Hamstra

Cook

. State of the evidence on simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg. 2013;257:586-593.

Partridge

Hughes

Brennan

Hennessey

IAM

. Accessible laparoscopic instrument tracking (“InsTrac”): construct validity in a take-home box simulator. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2014;24:578-583.

Pellen

MGCM

Horgan

LFL

Barton

JRJ

Attwood

SES

. Construct validity of the ProMIS laparoscopic simulator. Surg Endosc. 2009;23:130-139.

Oropesa

Sánchez-González

Chmarra

MKM

. EVA: laparoscopic instrument tracking based on endoscopic video analysis for psychomotor skills assessment. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1029-1039.

Allen

BFB

Kasper

Nataneli

Dutson

Faloutsos

. Visual tracking of laparoscopic instruments in standard training environments. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2011;163:11-17.

Kranzfelder

Schneider

Fiolka

. Real-time instrument detection in minimally invasive surgery using radiofrequency identification technology. J Surg Res. 2013;185:704-710.

Chmarra

Bakker

Grimbergen

Dankelman.

TrEndo, a device for tracking minimally invasive surgical instruments in training setups. Sens Actuators A Phys. 2006;126(2):7-7.

10.

Dargar

Sankaranarayanan

. ToolTrack™: a compact, low-cost system for measuring surgical tool motion. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;173:108-110.

11.

Evans

Partridge

Arvind

. A comparative study of surgical skills assessment in a physical laparoscopy simulator using wireless inertial sensors. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the Wireless Health; August 2014; National Institutes of Health, ACM, New York (Article 10).

12.

Brennan

Loan

Hughes

Hennessey

Partridge

. Surgical training is undermined by inadequate provision of laparoscopic surgical simulators. Bull R Coll Surg Engl. 2014;96:304-307.

13.

Milburn

JAJ

Khera

Hornby

STS

Malone

PSCP

Fitzgerald

JEFJ

. Introduction, availability and role of simulation in surgical education and training: review of current evidence and recommendations from the Association of Surgeons in Training. Int J Surg. 2012;10:393-398.

14.

Hennessey

IAM

Hewett

. Construct, concurrent, and content validity of the eoSim laparoscopic simulator. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013;23:855-860.

15.

Weichert

Bachmann

Rudak

Fisseler

. Analysis of the accuracy and robustness of the leap motion controller. Sensors (Basel). 2013;13:6380-6393.

16.

Khoshelham

Elberink

. Accuracy and resolution of Kinect depth data for indoor mapping applications. Sensors (Basel). 2012;12:1437-1454.

17.

Bizzotto

Costanzo

Bizzotto

Regis

Sandri

Magnan

. Leap motion gesture control with OsiriX in the operating room to control imaging: first experiences during live surgery. Surg Innov. 2014;21:655-656.

18.

Rosa

Elizondo

. Use of a gesture user interface as a touchless image navigation system in dental surgery: case series report. Imaging Sci Dent. 2014;44:155-160.

19.

Mason

Ansell

Warren

Torkington

. Is motion analysis a valid tool for assessing laparoscopic skill? Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1468-1477.

20.

Jensen Ang

Hopkins

Partridge

. Validating the use of smartphone-based accelerometers for performance assessment in a simulated neurosurgical task. Neurosurgery. 2014;10(suppl 1):57-64.