You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The effect on surgical skills of expert surgeons using 3D/HD and 2D/4K resolution monitors in laparoscopic phantom tasks
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-018-6169-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hitoshi Harada, Shingo Kanaji, Hiroshi Hasegawa, Masashi Yamamoto, Yoshiko Matsuda, Kimihiro Yamashita, Takeru Matsuda, Taro Oshikiri, Yasuo Sumi, Tetsu Nakamura, Satoshi Suzuki, Yoshihiro Kakeji |
| Abstract |
Recently, several new imaging technologies, such as three-dimensional (3D)/high-definition (HD) stereovision and high-resolution two-dimensional (2D)/4K monitors, have been introduced in laparoscopic surgery. However, it is still unclear whether these technologies actually improve surgical performance. Participants were 11 expert laparoscopic surgeons. We designed three laparoscopic suturing tasks (task 1: simple suturing, task 2: knotting thread in a small box, and task 3: suturing in a narrow space) in training boxes. Performances were recorded by an optical position tracker. All participants first performed each task five times consecutively using a conventional 2D/HD monitor. Then they were randomly divided into two groups: six participants performed the tasks using 3D/HD before using 2D/4K; the other five participants performed the tasks using a 2D/4K monitor before the 3D/HD monitor. After the trials, we evaluated the performance scores (operative time, path length of forceps, and technical errors) and compared performance scores across all monitors. Surgical performances of participants were ranked in decreasing order: 3D/HD, 2D/4K, and 2D/HD using the total scores for each task. In task 1 (simple suturing), some surgical performances using 3D/HD were significantly better than those using 2D/4K (P = 0.017, P = 0.033, P = 0.492 for operative time, path length, and technical errors, respectively). On the other hand, with operation in narrow spaces such as in tasks 2 and 3, performances using 2D/4K were not inferior to 3D/HD performances. The high-resolution images from the 2D/4K monitor may enhance depth perception in narrow spaces and may complement stereoscopic vision almost as well as using 3D/HD. Compared to a 2D/HD monitor, a 3D/HD monitor improved the laparoscopic surgical technique of expert surgeons more than a 2D/4K monitor. However, the advantage of 2D/4K high-resolution images may be comparable to a 3D/HD monitor especially in narrow spaces. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Colombia | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 71% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 29% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Researcher | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 17 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 43% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 18 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 September 2018.
All research outputs
#7,259,677
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#1,594
of 6,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,273
of 329,652 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#36
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,125 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,652 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.