What is it about?

Robotic assistance to Minimally Invasive Surgery is realized today through a telemanipulated approach. We identify three unintended impacts of Telemanipulation in Robotic Assisted Surgery: 1. The Autonomous but Withdrawn Surgeon. The surgeon gains autonomy, as the telemanipulation console lets her control all the complex operations of the robot independently, however, overloading her cognition which can lead to errors in manipulating the robotic interface. Sitting at the console withdraws the surgeon, reducing situational awareness of other team member's actions as well as social interaction with the team. 2. Shifting the Use of Perceptual Senses. The telemanipulation console removes haptic feedback and isolates the surgeon's attention, limiting visual contact with the team. 3. From Surgeon Assistant to Robot Assistant. The surgical assistant's tasks shift from assisting the surgeon (holding a tissue, cutting) to assisting the robot (untangling arms, changing tools). In conclusion, robots bring enormous benefits to surgery, but their interface design can cause even greater drawbacks. Telemanipulation is one approach but not the only one. We encourage future HCI research to explore the continuum Surgeon-to-Patient distance as a design dimension, bringing the surgeon closer to the patient and her team, and thus making surgery minimally invasive not only for the patient but also for the surgeon.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Robotic surgery does not necessarily have to be telemenipulated.


We open the discussion to other approaches to surgical robotics, that are not necessarily telemenipulated.

Ignacio Avellino

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Impacts of Telemanipulation in Robotic Assisted Surgery, May 2019, ACM (Association for Computing Machinery), DOI: 10.1145/3290605.3300813.
You can read the full text:



The following have contributed to this page