Abstract
Purpose
The use of robotics is emerging for performing interventional radiology procedures. Robots in interventional radiology are typically controlled using button presses and joystick movements. This study identified how different human–robot interfaces affect endovascular surgical performance using interventional radiology simulations.
Methods
Nine participants performed a navigation task on an interventional radiology simulator with three different human–computer interfaces. Using Simulation Open Framework Architecture we developed a simulation profile of vessels, catheters and guidewires. We designed and manufactured a bespoke haptic interventional radiology controller for robotic systems to control the simulation. Metrics including time taken for navigation, number of incorrect catheterisations, number of catheter and guidewire prolapses and forces applied to vessel walls were measured and used to characterise the interfaces. Finally, participants responded to a questionnaire to evaluate the perception of the controllers.
Results
Time taken for navigation, number of incorrect catheterisations and the number of catheter and guidewire prolapses, showed that the device-mimicking controller is better suited for controlling interventional neuroradiology procedures over joystick control approaches. Qualitative metrics also showed that interventional radiologists prefer a device-mimicking controller approach over a joystick approach.
Conclusion
Of the four metrics used to compare and contrast the human–robot interfaces, three conclusively showed that a device-mimicking controller was better suited for controlling interventional neuroradiology robotics.
The use of robotics is emerging for performing interventional radiology procedures. Robots in interventional radiology are typically controlled using button presses and joystick movements. This study identified how different human–robot interfaces affect endovascular surgical performance using interventional radiology simulations.
Methods
Nine participants performed a navigation task on an interventional radiology simulator with three different human–computer interfaces. Using Simulation Open Framework Architecture we developed a simulation profile of vessels, catheters and guidewires. We designed and manufactured a bespoke haptic interventional radiology controller for robotic systems to control the simulation. Metrics including time taken for navigation, number of incorrect catheterisations, number of catheter and guidewire prolapses and forces applied to vessel walls were measured and used to characterise the interfaces. Finally, participants responded to a questionnaire to evaluate the perception of the controllers.
Results
Time taken for navigation, number of incorrect catheterisations and the number of catheter and guidewire prolapses, showed that the device-mimicking controller is better suited for controlling interventional neuroradiology procedures over joystick control approaches. Qualitative metrics also showed that interventional radiologists prefer a device-mimicking controller approach over a joystick approach.
Conclusion
Of the four metrics used to compare and contrast the human–robot interfaces, three conclusively showed that a device-mimicking controller was better suited for controlling interventional neuroradiology robotics.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1977-1986 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue number | 11 |
| Early online date | 17 Jul 2023 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Nov 2023 |