Fig 1.
Overview of the grasping forceps with markers.
Fig 2.
Registration process of the surgical instrument in the MoCap system.
Fig 3.
Overview of the porcine cadaver organ.
(a),(b) An aorta of porcine cadaver before (a) and after (b) the dissection task (c),(d) Incised kidney of porcine cadaver before (c) and after (d) the suturing/knotting task.
Fig 4.
Experimental environment.
Fig 5.
Camera configuration.
Table 1.
Measurement success rate and average error of each surgical instrument.
Table 2.
Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients of kinematic indices between both systems.
Table 3.
Averages of user evaluation of surgical instruments with markers.
Fig 6.
Experiment environment.
Fig 7.
Experimental device set up.
Fig 8.
(a) ROI based on cannula position. (b) ROI based on anatomical marker position.
Table 4.
Summary of the measurement success rate (%) in cadaver surgical training.
Table 5.
Averages of user evaluation of surgical instruments with markers in cadaver surgical training.
Fig 9.
Data flow of data correction process.
Fig 10.
Trajectory of the tip position of all surgical instruments.
Fig 11.
Attitude angle of the instruments handled by right hand.
Table 6.
Result of the feature extraction.