Historically, the performance of surgeons has been assessed subjectively by senior surgical staff in both training and operating environments. In this work, the position and motion of surgical instruments are analyzed through an objective process, denoted C-PASS, to measure surgeon performance of laparoscopic, endoscopic, and image-guided procedures. To develop C-PASS, clinically relevant performance characteristics were identified. Then measurement techniques for parameters that represented each characteristic were derived, and analytic techniques were implemented to transform these parameters into explicit, robust metrics. The metrics comprise the C-PASS performance assessment method, which has been validated over the last 3 years in studies of laparoscopy and endoscopy. These studies show that C-PASS is straightforward, reproducible, and accurate. It is sufficiently powerful to assess the efficiency of these complex processes. It is likely that C-PASS and similar approaches will improve skills acquisition and learning and also enable the objective comparison of systems and techniques.
Stylopoulos N., Rattner DWRobotics and ergonomics. Surg Clin North Am.2003;83:1321-1337.
2.
Ellsmere J., Stoll J., Wells W. III, et al. A new visualization technique for laparoscopic ultrasonography . Surgery. 2004;136:84-92.
3.
Stylopoulos N., Vernon AH, Pujol S., et al. Image Registered Laparoscopic Ultrasound (IRLUS) decreases the frustration and the workload of laparoscopic ultrasound. Presented at: Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Annual Meeting; April 2005; Ft Lauderdale, FL.
4.
Stahl JE, Sandberg WS, Daily B., et al. Reorganizing patient care and workflow in the operating room: a cost-effectiveness study. Surgery. 2006;139:717-728.
5.
Reijnen MM, Zeebregts CJ, Meijerink WJFuture of operating rooms. Surg Technol Int.2005;14:21-27.
6.
Szold A.Seeing is believing: visualization systems in endoscopic surgery (video, HDTV, stereoscopy, and beyond). Surg Endosc. 2005 ;19:730-733.
7.
Sokal SM, Craft DL, Chang Y., Sandberg WS, Berger DLMaximizing operating room and recovery room capacity in an era of constrained resources. Arch Surg.2006; 141: 389-395.
8.
Berguer R., Smith W.An ergonomic comparison of robotic and laparoscopic technique: the influence of surgeon experience and task complexity. J Surg Res.2006;134: 87-92.
9.
Seibert JAFlat-panel detectors: how much better are they?Pediatr Radiol.2006;36(suppl 14):173-181.
10.
Wauben LS, van Veelen MA, Gossot D., Goossens RHApplication of ergonomic guidelines during minimally invasive surgery: a questionnaire survey of 284 surgeons. Surg Endosc. 2006;20:1268-1274.
11.
Becker HD, Herth F., Ernst A., Schwarz Y.Bronchoscopic biopsy of peripheral lung lesions under electromagnetic guidance: a pilot study. J Bronchol.2005;12:9-13.
12.
Marvik R., Lango T., Tangen GALaparoscopic navigation pointer for three-dimensional image-guided surgery . Surg Endosc. 2004;18:1242-1248.
13.
Berguer R., Forkey DL, Smith WDThe effect of laparoscopic instrument working angle on surgeons' upper extremity workload. Surg Endosc. 2001;15:1027-1029.
14.
Hagberg M.Electromyographic signs of shoulder muscular fatigue in two elevated arm positions . Am J Phys Med.1981;60:111-121.
15.
Stock SRWorkplace ergonomic factors and the development of musculoskeletal disorders of the neck and upper limbs: a meta-analysis. Am J Ind Med.1991;19: 87-107.
16.
Mirbod S., Yoshida H., Miyamoto K., Miyashita K., Inaba R., Iwata H.Subjective complaints in orthopedists and general surgeons. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 1995;67: 179-186.
17.
Scott DJ, Rege RV, Bergen PC, et al. Measuring operative performance after laparoscopic skills training: edited videotape versus direct observation. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A.2000; 10: 183-190.
18.
Stylopoulos N., Cotin S., Maithel SK, et al. Computer-enhanced laparoscopic training system (CELTS): bridging the gap. Surg Endosc. 2004; 18:782-789.
19.
Lin HC, Shafran I., Murphy TE, Okamura AM, Yuh DD, Hager GDAutomatic detection and segmentation of robot-assisted surgical motions. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv.2005;8(pt 1):802-810.
20.
Hogan N., Flash T.Moving gracefully: quantitative theories of motor coordination. Trends Neurosci.1987;10:170-174.
21.
Mavrogiorgou P., Mergl R., Tigges P., et al. Kinematic analysis of handwriting movements in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2001; 70:605-612.
22.
Howell DCFundamental Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury Press; 1998.
23.
Kane R.Intraoperative, Laparoscopic, and Endoluminal Ultrasound. Philadelphia, PA: Churchill Livingstone; 1999.
24.
Harms J., Feussner H., Baumgartner M., et al. Three-dimensional navigated laparoscopic ultrasonography. Surg Endosc. 2001;15:1459-1462.
25.
MicroBird.Ascension Technology, Burlington, Vt. Available at: http://www.ascension-tech.com/. Accessed January 2004.
26.
Hart SG, Staveland LEDevelopment of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): results of empirical and theoretical research. In: Hancock PA, Meshkati N, eds. Human Mental Workload. Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland; 1998:139-183.
27.
Blue Phantom. Available at: http://www.bluephantom.com/ DesktopDefault.aspx?TabId=81. Accessed July 2004.
28.
Vosburgh KG , Stylopoulos N., Thompson CC, et al. Novel real time tracking interface improves the use of laparoscopic and endoscopic ultrasound in the abdomen . Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg.2006;1(suppl 1):282-284.
29.
Vosburgh KG , Stylopoulos N., San Jose Estepar R., et al. EUS and CT improve efficiency and structure identification over conventional EUS. Gastrointest Endosc. In press.
30.
Dosis A., Aggarwal R., Bello F., et al. Synchronized video and motion analysis for the assessment of procedures in the operating theater. Arch Surg.2005;140:293-299.
31.
Brown JD, Rosen J., Chang L., Sinanan MN, Hannaford B.Quantifying surgeon grasping mechanics in laparoscopy using the Blue DRAGON system. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2004;98:34-36.
32.
Rosen J., MacFarlane M., Richards C., Hannaford B., Sinanan M.Surgeon-tool force/torque signatures: evaluation of surgical skills in minimally invasive surgery. Stud Health Technol Inform. 1999;62:290-296.
33.
Charles S., Williams RE, Hamel B.Design of a surgeon-machine interface for teleoperated microsurgery: engineering in medicine and biology society: images of the twenty-first century. Proceedings of the Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering, Seattle, Wash, 9-12 November, 1989. Memphis, TN: Center for Engineering Applications; 1989.
34.
Birkett DHAdvanced Display Devices. In: Satava RM, ed. Cybersurgery: Advanced Technologies for Surgical Practice. New York, NY: Wiley-Liss; 1998:121-127.
35.
Ritter EM, McClusky DA III, Gallagher AG, Smith CDReal-time objective assessment of knot quality with a portable tensiometer is superior to execution time for assessment of laparoscopic knot-tying performance . Surg Innov.2005;12:233-237.
36.
Rosser JC Jr, Rosser LE, Savalgi RSObjective evaluation of a laparoscopic surgical skill program for residents and senior surgeons. Arch Surg.1998;133:657-661.
37.
Top Gun Laparoscopic Skill Shootout Station. SAGES 2005 annual meeting. Available at: http://www.sages.org/ 05program/sages/learningctr.html. Accessed September 2005.
