Suppr超能文献

比较使用不同输入设备在数字病理学中时的肌肉活动。

Comparison of muscle activity while using different input devices in digital pathology.

机构信息

Servicio de Anatomía Patológica, Hospital Universitario Morales Meseguer, Murcia, Spain.

Servicio de Anatomía Patológica, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Albacete, Spain.

出版信息

Rev Esp Patol. 2022 Jan-Mar;55(1):19-25. doi: 10.1016/j.patol.2021.02.005. Epub 2021 Apr 5.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The high prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders in pathologists, together with the current trend towards the digitization of pathology, prompted us to study the different types of input devices employed during the revision of whole slide images, in order to investigate the pattern and extent of muscle activity involved in their use.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A comparative study was made of 10 input devices (conventional and vertical mouse, three trackballs, the Ergopointer™, the Rollermouse™, an optical pen mouse, a touchpad, and the Leap Motion™). Six medical students performed a standardized circuit using a Fitts' Law based tissue array, digitized. The electrical activity of seven upper limb muscles (adductor pollicis, extensor pollicis longus, extensor digitorum, flexor digitorum, middle deltoid, upper trapezius, and middle trapezius) was measured using surface electromyography.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences in the overall electrical activity among the different input devices, both absolute values in mV as well as normalized values to the upper limb at rest, were observed (p<0.001); the Rollermouse™ (0.1027mV; 139%), Logitech M570 trackball (0.1053mV; 145%), Ergopointer™ (0.1151mV; 167%), conventional mouse (0.1251mV; 191%), and vertical mouse (0.1312mV; 205%) required less activity, while the optical pen mouse (0.1717mV; 299%), Leap Motion™ (0.1803mV; 319%), Expert Mouse trackball (0.1845mV; 329%), EIGIIS trackball (0.2442mV; 468%) and the touchpad (0.2560mV; 496%) required greater muscle mobilization.

CONCLUSION

We designed a system based on Fitts' Law to compare input devices in digital pathology. Variability between compared devices and muscle activity was found. Long-term use could result in different muscular fatigue patterns. Even though the selection of an input device is a matter of personal preference, its impact on ergonomics should be considered.

摘要

简介

由于病理学家中肌肉骨骼疾病的高发率,以及当前病理学数字化的趋势,我们研究了在查看全切片图像时使用的不同类型输入设备,以调查涉及使用这些设备的肌肉活动模式和程度。

材料和方法

对 10 种输入设备(传统和垂直鼠标、三个轨迹球、Ergopointer™、Rollermouse™、光学笔鼠标、触摸板和 Leap Motion™)进行了比较研究。六位医学生使用基于 Fitts 定律的组织阵列对标准化电路进行了操作,该组织阵列已被数字化。使用表面肌电图测量了七个上肢肌肉(拇指内收肌、拇指长伸肌、伸指肌、指深屈肌、三角肌中部、上斜方肌和中斜方肌)的电活动。

结果

观察到不同输入设备之间的整体电活动存在显著差异,绝对值以 mV 为单位,也以与休息时上肢的归一化值为单位(p<0.001);Rollermouse™(0.1027mV;139%)、Logitech M570 轨迹球(0.1053mV;145%)、Ergopointer™(0.1151mV;167%)、传统鼠标(0.1251mV;191%)和垂直鼠标(0.1312mV;205%)需要较少的活动,而光学笔鼠标(0.1717mV;299%)、Leap Motion™(0.1803mV;319%)、Expert Mouse 轨迹球(0.1845mV;329%)、EIGIIS 轨迹球(0.2442mV;468%)和触摸板(0.2560mV;496%)需要更大的肌肉动员。

结论

我们设计了一个基于 Fitts 定律的系统来比较数字病理学中的输入设备。在比较的设备之间发现了可变性和肌肉活动。长期使用可能会导致不同的肌肉疲劳模式。尽管输入设备的选择是个人偏好的问题,但应考虑其对人体工程学的影响。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验