Patient-Specific Vascular Modeling - Microsurgery: Advances, Simulations, and Applications - page 121

3.12.3.2 Evaluation by layperson
The evaluation of the utility of the simulation system proposed in
this research was exerted by a general person (layperson) from the
standpoint of receiving medical treatments. In order to exert this
evaluation, we exhibited the simulator at the International Robot
Exhibition 2005 for ive days in November 2005. The following
evaluations were executed by more than 1000 visitors for this
period. Figure 3.47 shows the appearance of this exhibition.
Evaluation method: Leading the tip of a micro-catheter to the BT
aneurysm fabricated on cerebral artery, using widely utilized medical
tools, which include catheter, guide wire, micro-catheter, and micro
guide-wire. The layperson inserts the tip of micro-catheter into the
one of the three branches (diameter: 1 mm, c.f. Fig. 3.48) artiicially
fabricated on the aneurysm.
Evaluation item: After exerting the above-mentioned surgical
treatment, the comprehensive simulator is graded from the following
three different viewpoints by four ranks (“excellent,” “satisfactory,”
“ordinal” and “not good”). Here, we explained verbally that the
vascular model is constructed by individual patient information and
applicable for individual patient diagnosis and surgical planning.
Evaluation Aspect:
1. As patient receiving medical treatments
2. As the interventionalist who executes endovascular
treatments
Evaluation item:
Aspect 1-1: Effectiveness of patient-speciic vascular model
Aspect 1-2: Do you consider necessary to construct a vascular model
for your treatment?
Aspect 2-1: Did you understand the simulated surgical method?
Aspect 2-2: Effectiveness of stress evaluation
Aspect 2-3: Effectiveness as a training environment
As a result of this evaluation, acquired data is summarized in
Figs. 3.49 and 3.50. The number of evaluators who executed this
questionnaire is 325.
First of all, as to the “evaluation from the standpoint as a patient
who receive medical treatments,” three-fourth (74%) of the entire
population answered that “the proposed patient-speciic vascular
model is very useful for diagnosis” (average score calculated by
supposing “excellent = 3,” “good = 2,” “not good = 1” was 2.7/3.0).