Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2022 Jul;36(7):5282-5292.
doi: 10.1007/s00464-021-08906-z. Epub 2021 Dec 6.

Validation of the portable virtual reality training system for robotic surgery (PoLaRS): a randomized controlled trial

Sem F Hardon  1   2 , Anton Kooijmans #  3 , Roel Horeman  2 , Maarten van der Elst  3   4 , Alexander L A Bloemendaal  3 , Tim Horeman #  5   6
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Validation of the portable virtual reality training system for robotic surgery (PoLaRS): a randomized controlled trial

Sem F Hardon et al. Surg Endosc. 2022 Jul.

Abstract

Background: As global use of surgical robotic systems is steadily increasing, surgical simulation can be an excellent way for robotic surgeons to acquire and retain their skills in a safe environment. To address the need for training in less wealthy parts of the world, an affordable surgical robot simulator (PoLaRS) was designed.

Methods: The aim of this pilot study is to compare learning curve data of the PoLaRS prototype with those of Intuitive Surgical's da Vinci Skills Simulator (dVSS) and to establish face- and construct validity. Medical students were divided into two groups; the test group (n = 18) performing tasks on PoLaRS and dVSS, and the control group (n = 20) only performing tasks on the dVSS. The performance parameters were Time, Path length, and the number of collisions. Afterwards, the test group participants filled in a questionnaire regarding both systems.

Results: A total of 528 trials executed by 38 participants were measured and included for analyses. The test group significantly improved in Time, Path Length and Collisions during the PoLaRS test phase (P ≤ 0.028). No differences was found between the test group and the control group in the dVSS performances during the post-test phase. Learning curves showed similar shapes between both systems, and between both groups. Participants recognized the potential benefits of simulation training on the PoLaRS system.

Conclusions: Robotic surgical skills improved during training with PoLaRS. This shows the potential of PoLaRS to become an affordable alternative to current surgical robot simulators. Validation with similar tasks and different expert levels is needed before implementing the training system into robotic training curricula.

Keywords: Learning curve; Patient safety-LMIC; Robot surgery; Simulation training.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Tim Horeman is founder of the Medtech start-up company Surge-On Medical that collaborated in the development of PolaRS. Sem F. Hardon, Anton Kooijmans, Roel Horeman, Maarten van der Elst and Alexander L.A. Bloemendaal have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Overview of PoLaRS prototype (left) and dVSS system (right) in use
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Flowchart of study design
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Boxplots of performance parameters of both ‘Marble sorting’ and ‘Pass through’ tasks on PoLaRS. ‘X’ indicates mean. Significant differences as indicated by the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks test are indicated with a p-value < 0.05
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Boxplots of performance parameters of ‘Pick and Place’ task on dVSS. ‘X’ indicates mean. Significant differences as indicated by the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks test are indicated with a p-value < 0.05
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Boxplots of performance parameters of ‘Sea Spikes 1’ task on dVSS. ‘X’ indicates mean. Significant differences as indicated by the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks test are indicated with a p-value < 0.05
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Bar diagram of questionnaire responses with standard deviation bars
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Surgical robots market size, share and industry analysis by application (General Surgery, Gynecology, Urology Orthopedics, Others) and regional forecast, 2019–2026. Market Research Report, July 2019.
    1. Honda M, Morizane S, Hikita K, Takenaka A. Current status of robotic surgery in urology. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2017;10(4):372–381. doi: 10.1111/ases.12381. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lawrie TA, Liu H, Lu DH, et al. Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011422.pub2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nakayama M, Holsinger FC, Chevalier D, Orosco RK. The dawn of robotic surgery in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2019;49(5):404–411. doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyz020. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ericsson KA. Deliberate practice and acquisition of expert performance: a general overview. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15(11):988–994. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00227.x. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types