Impact of 3D vision on mental workload and laparoscopic performance in inexperienced subjects

Gómez‐Gómez, Enrique; Carrasco‐Valiente, Julia; Valero-Rosa, J.; Campos-Hernández, J.P.; Anglada-Curado, F.J.; Carazo-Carazo, Jose Luis; Font‐Ugalde, Pilar; Requena-Tapia, M.J.

doi:10.1016/j.acuroe.2015.03.006

Cited by 17 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Egi et al found that those with a low space perception ability performed endoscopic tasks better with 3D visualization than with 2D ( P = .0085) . Studies have identified other relevant cognitive factors that may be important in 3D endoscopy; one ENT article and several laparoscopic articles have found that 3D endoscopy reduced task workload, a measure of cognitive processing required.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three‐dimensional endoscopy: The future of nasoendoscopic training

Bickerton¹,

Nassimizadeh

Ahmed

2019

The Laryngoscope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives/Hypothesis Three‐dimensional (3D) endoscopy is an emerging tool in surgery that provides real‐time depth perception. Its benefits have been investigated in surgical training, but the current literature lacks significant objective outcome data. We aimed to objectively compare the efficacy of two‐dimensional (2D) versus 3D high‐definition endoscopes in novice users. Study Design Prospective, randomized crossover study. Methods Ninety‐two novice medical students who used both 2D and 3D endoscopes to complete two validated tasks in a box trainer participated in the study. Time taken and error rates were measured, and subjective data were collected. Results Wilcoxon tests showed 3D technology was significantly faster than 2D (78 vs. 95 seconds, P = .004), and errors per task were significantly lower (3 vs. 5, P < .001). Sixty‐nine percent of participants preferred the 3D endoscope. Conclusions 3D high‐definition endoscopy could be instrumental in training the next generation of endoscopic surgeons. Further research is required in a clinical setting. Level of Evidence 2b Laryngoscope, 129:1280–1285, 2019

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three‐dimensional endoscopy: The future of nasoendoscopic training

Bickerton¹,

Nassimizadeh

Ahmed

2019

The Laryngoscope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gómez-Gómez et al measured the mental workload using the NASA Task Load Index with five standardized tasks. Although 3D laparoscopy produced a smaller mental workload, more adverse reactions such as dizziness and headache were reported (33).…”

Section: Surgeons' Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Headache, nausea and eye strain from 3D laparoscopy have been reported (29)(30)(31)(32), although these were not consistently demonstrated across different studies and subjects (13,14). Three studies reported increased adverse reactions with 3D laparoscopy (25,30,33). In a randomized prospective study by Usta et al, 24 participants were required to perform 10 standardized tasks and asked to report any adverse reactions experienced when using 3D or 2D laparoscopy.…”

Section: Surgeons' Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Three-dimensional laparoscopy: is it as good as it looks?—a review of the literature

Yim¹,

Lo²,

Lau³

et al. 2017

Ann. Laparosc. Endosc. Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technological advancement has benefited minimal invasive surgery substantially. In terms of enhanced operative vision, three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy provides binocular depth perception, which was absent in the past with the conventional two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy. There have been a number of studies comparing the use of 2D and 3D laparoscopy over the years and they were reviewed in this article. Essentially, 3D laparoscopy resulted in better performance time and lower error rates with specific tasks in experimental settings, and this was seen in surgeons across different levels of experience. The advantage in terms of operative and clinical outcome was equivocal, with some studies demonstrated faster operating time and less blood loss while others showing similar results. Long-term results in this aspect are scarce. Despite these, surgeons appeared to prefer 3D laparoscopy to the conventional 2D imaging system. Nevertheless, there are still questions to be answered and the role of 3D laparoscopy can be better defined with evidence from future studies.

show abstract

“…The first study in the scientific literature that compared the use of 2D and 3D vision systems in laparoscopic urology was from 1996. 12 The most commonly used 3D imaging systems were the Karl Storz FULL HD 3D System (Karl Storz GmbH & Co. KG, Tüttlingen, Germany) [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] and the Viking 3D HD Laparoscopic Vision System (Viking Systems, Inc., La Jolla, CA). [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] Additionally, the Einstein Vision 3D (Schoelly-Fibreoptic GMBH, Germany) was used in some studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the study from Gómez-Gómez et al described significantly higher incidences of headache and visual distress using the 3D imaging system. 17 In contrast, the study from Ö zsoy et al reported better visual comfort when using 3D vision. 18 Novice surgeons reported a significant reduction in overall workload when using 3D vision compared with 2D vision during laparoscopic training 17,18 (Table 3).…”

Section: Ergonomicsmentioning

confidence: 91%

Comparative Study of the Influence of Three-Dimensional Versus Two-Dimensional Urological Laparoscopy on Surgeons' Surgical Performance and Ergonomics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Sánchez‐Margallo

Durán-Rey

Pascual

et al. 2021

Journal of Endourology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the use of three-dimensional (3D) vision systems with traditional two-dimensional systems in laparoscopic urological surgery, analyzing the benefits, limitations, and impact of introducing this medical technology with regard to surgical performance and the surgeon's ergonomics. Methods: A systematic review with a structured bibliographic search was conducted in the electronic libraries (PubMed and EMBASE) until August 2019 and with no language restrictions. Studies on 3D visualization technology in laparoscopic urologic surgery, randomized controlled trials, and observational comparative studies were included. Relevant data were extracted and analyzed. Results: A total of 25 articles were obtained, of which 4 were clinical studies with patients, 2 studies were carried out in experimental animal models, and the remaining 19 were conducted in simulated environments. Regarding the European training program in basic laparoscopic urological skills, the results showed no significant differences in execution time using either imaging system. Three-dimensional vision led to a significant reduction in surgery time in pyeloplasty and radical nephrectomy. In addition, there was a reported decrease in blood loss in adrenalectomy, nephron-sparing nephrectomy, radical nephrectomy, simple nephrectomy, and pyeloplasty using 3D vision. Regarding ergonomics, the studies generally described no differences in side effects (headache, nausea, eye strain) when comparing the two types of visualization systems. Surgeons reported reduced workloads and stress with 3D vision than with traditional laparoscopy. Conclusions: Three-dimensional laparoscopic systems essentially advance surgical performance in lessexperienced laparoscopic surgeons. Three-dimensional laparoscopy leads to improvements in surgery time, which is important for specific surgical procedures involving intracorporeal ligatures and sutures. The results achieved on the surgeons' ergonomics showed better depth perception and decreased stress and workloads during 3D vision with no differences in potential side effects.

show abstract

Impact of 3D vision on mental workload and laparoscopic performance in inexperienced subjects

Cited by 17 publications

References 22 publications

Three‐dimensional endoscopy: The future of nasoendoscopic training

Three‐dimensional endoscopy: The future of nasoendoscopic training

Three-dimensional laparoscopy: is it as good as it looks?—a review of the literature

Comparative Study of the Influence of Three-Dimensional Versus Two-Dimensional Urological Laparoscopy on Surgeons' Surgical Performance and Ergonomics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About