Quantitative metrics for evaluating surgical dexterity using virtual reality simulations

Fig 1. LAP Mentor high-fidelity virtual simulator.

Fig 2. Overall flowchart of research methodology.

Fig 3. Hardware implementation of the experimental setup.

Fig 4. Architecture of software deployment.

Fig 5. Summary of experimental setups with different controlled configurations.

Fig 6. Dynamic motion depicting the cursor moving from the starting point to the target point. This phase assesses the surgeon’s ability to initiate and control movement toward a surgical target, which is critical for tasks that require reaching and positioning within a confined space.

Fig 7. Static motion showing the cursor reaching the target point and remaining steady for 3 seconds. This phase evaluates the surgeon’s capacity for maintaining focus and stability, which is essential for performing precise surgical maneuvers.

Fig 8. Data grouping based on controlled experimental factors.

Fig 9. Composite figure illustrating the effects of visual magnification on surgical performance. This figure compares 1x and 10x visual magnifications, showcasing their impact on motion path length, economy of movement, motion path accuracy, precision, and smoothness across various surgical tasks and target locations.

Fig 10. Composite figure illustrating the effects of visual magnification on surgical performance. This figure compares 1x and 10x visual magnifications, demonstrating their impact on motion path length, economy of movement, and motion path precision across different target locations.

Fig 11. Comparison of surgical performance between dominant and non-dominant hands.

Fig 12. Comprehensive comparison of various performance metrics among different surgical specialties. The metrics include motion path length, economy of movement, motion path accuracy, precision, and smoothness, highlighting significant differences observed particularly in oral and maxillofacial surgery.