Evaluates AI-based kinematic scoring in medical students for assessing surgical skills, indicating feasibility.
Background Artificial intelligence (AI) enables hand motion tracking from standard surgical video recordings; however, translating these data into meaningful performance metrics remains challenging. We evaluated the preliminary validity of a markerless, AI-driven system that generates interpretable technical skill scores from an open-surgery task. Methods Sixteen medical students and one instructor performed a one-handed knot-tying task recorded with a smartphone camera while wearing motion sensors beneath surgical gloves. A deep learning algorithm tracking 21 hand joints mapped wrist trajectories and generated visualization boundaries from which kinematic parameters were derived and grouped into three domains scored from 0 to 10: economy of motion (EM), flow of motion (FM), and spatial organization (SO). AI metrics were validated against sensor-based data. Parameters and domain scores were correlated with expert-rated product quality (PQ) and technical performance (TP) using validated checklists. Results Nineteen performances were analyzed. AI metrics demonstrated strong correlations with sensor-based measures (r = 0.79-0.88, P < 0.01). EM metrics (path length, number of movements, task time) were associated with PQ and TP (r = 0.59-0.67, P < 0.01). Smoothness within the FM domain correlated with PQ and TP (r = 0.56-0.57, P < 0.01), while the composite FM score moderately correlated with TP (r = 0.44, P = 0.057). Working area within the SO domain demonstrated a moderate association with TP (r = 0.41, P = 0.08). Conclusion This prototype AI framework translated hand kinematics into interpretable, cohort-normalized domain-level scores that aligned with expert assessment. The findings support the feasibility of video-based kinematic scoring and provide preliminary evidence of construct validity. Further studies are warranted to determine reliability and generalizability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zulbaran‐Rojas et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: