Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science Cover Image for Volume 65, Issue 7
June 2024
Volume 65, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2024
PhacoTrainer: Artificial Intelligence-Generated Performance Ratings for Cataract Surgery
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Simmi Sen
    Byers Eye Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, United States
  • Hsu-Hang Yeh
    Byers Eye Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, United States
  • Sophia Wang
    Byers Eye Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, United States
  • Jonathan Chou
    Byers Eye Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, United States
  • Karen Christopher
    University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Simmi Sen None; Hsu-Hang Yeh None; Sophia Wang None; Jonathan Chou None; Karen Christopher None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2024, Vol.65, 2092. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Simmi Sen, Hsu-Hang Yeh, Sophia Wang, Jonathan Chou, Karen Christopher; PhacoTrainer: Artificial Intelligence-Generated Performance Ratings for Cataract Surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2024;65(7):2092.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) models for video have enabled the automatic calculation of granular performance metrics for cataract surgeries. However, the correlation between AI metrics and cataract surgical skill is unclear. This study investigates the ability of AI approaches to distinguish surgical skill performance between novice and expert cataract surgeons and correlates these AI-generated surgical performance metrics to those generated by expert human judges.

Methods : 28 resident and 29 attending routine cataract surgical videos were anonymously collected. For each video, six AI-generated metrics were calculated: phacoemulsification probe decentration, eye decentration, zoom level change, and instrument-specific total path length, maximum velocity, and area covered. Expert human raters independently rated the videos using Objective Structured Assessment of Cataract Surgical Skill (OSACSS), which has 20 sub-items on a 5-point scale, with higher scores indicating greater surgical skill. Statistical differences between machine & human-rated scores between attending and trainee surgeons were tested by t-tests, and the correlations between them were examined by Pearson correlation coefficients.

Results : Phacoemulsification probe & irrigation/aspiration probe had significantly lower total path lengths, maximum velocities, and area metrics in attending videos compared to trainee videos. Attending surgeons exhibited significantly better phacoemulsification centration and eye fixation. Most AI metrics correlated with human-rated OSACSS scores, including tool-specific metrics (total path length, max velocity, area) and metrics related to microscope control (eye decentration: -0.394). AI-generated metrics with corresponding OSACSS subitems also exhibited significant negative correlations (eye decentration: -0.65, phacoemulsification probe centration: -0.64, Figure).

Conclusions : Automatically generated AI-metrics effectively distinguish between attending and trainee surgeries and correlate with human expert evaluations of surgical performance. These metrics, generated rapidly from cataract surgical videos, can provide performance feedback for trainees, holding the potential for creating an automated, objective feedback system in ophthalmology training, ensuring standardized and consistent analysis of surgical techniques.

This abstract was presented at the 2024 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, WA, May 5-9, 2024.

 

Figure. Scatterplots of AI metrics and the corresponding OSACSS item ratings

Figure. Scatterplots of AI metrics and the corresponding OSACSS item ratings

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×