4.7 Article

Modeling Surgical Technical Skill Using Expert Assessment for Automated Computer Rating

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGERY
卷 269, 期 3, 页码 574-581

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002478

关键词

computer vision; marker-less video tracking; objective structured assessment of technical skills; objective structured assessment of technical skills; surgical task analysis

类别

资金

  1. Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program through the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) [UL1TR000427]
  2. AHRQ [F32 HS022403]
  3. NIH [T32 CA90217]
  4. AAS Research Fellowship Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Computer vision was used to predict expert performance ratings from surgeon hand motions for tying and suturing tasks. Summary Background Data: Existing methods, including the objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS), have proven reliable, but do not readily discriminate at the task level. Computer vision may be used for evaluating distinct task performance throughout an operation. Methods: Open surgeries was videoed and surgeon hands were tracked without using sensors or markers. An expert panel of 3 attending surgeons rated tying and suturing video clips on continuous scales from 0 to 10 along 3 task measures adapted from the broader OSATS: motion economy, fluidity of motion, and tissue handling. Empirical models were developed to predict the expert consensus ratings based on the hand kinematic data records. Results: The predicted versus panel ratings for suturing had slopes from 0.73 to 1, and intercepts from 0.36 to 1.54 (Average R-2 = 0.81). Predicted versus panel ratings for tying had slopes from 0.39 to 0.88, and intercepts from 0.79 to 4.36 (Average R-2 = 0.57). The mean square error among predicted and expert ratings was consistently less than the mean squared difference among individual expert ratings and the eventual consensus ratings. Conclusions: The computer algorithm consistently predicted the panel ratings of individual tasks, and were more objective and reliable than individual assessment by surgical experts.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据