对比人与机器人远程操作超声，发现人操作更实用且力控更稳定。
Robotic versus Human Teleoperation for Remote Ultrasound
- 用真人远程手把手指导替代机器人操作，降低部署难度。
- 完成时间与定位精度差异不显著，平均差值仅1.8%和0.5%。
- 适合资源有限的偏远地区，尤其看重易用性和成本的场景。
诊断性超声检查广泛应用，安全且成本低，但对操作者专业水平要求高，而具备资质的人员常集中在大城市，导致偏远地区患者面临出行困难、费用高昂和等待时间长的问题。为此，远程超声技术正被开发，包括机器人远程操作和近期兴起的人类远程操作——即由新手用户在混合现实指导下进行手把手远程操作。目前尚无二者对比研究，其优劣不明。人类操作因成本更低、部署更简单，可能更适合小型社区，前提是性能相当。本文评估了人类与机器人远程操作的差异，考察设置时间、灵活性等实际因素，并实验比较完成时间、位置追踪和力一致性等指标。结果表明，人类操作在完成时间（均值差异1.8%）和定位精度（均值差异0.5%）上无统计学显著差异，且力控表现更一致，同时显著更实用、易获取。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Diagnostic medical ultrasound is widely used, safe, and relatively low cost but requires a high degree of expertise to acquire and interpret the images. Personnel with this expertise are often not available outside of larger cities, leading to difficult, costly travel and long wait times for rural populations. To address this issue, tele-ultrasound techniques are being developed, including robotic teleoperation and recently human teleoperation, in which a novice user is remotely guided in a hand-over-hand manner through mixed reality to perform an ultrasound exam. These methods have not been compared, and their relative strengths are unknown. Human teleoperation may be more practical than robotics for small communities due to its lower cost and complexity, but this is only relevant if the performance is comparable. This paper therefore evaluates the differences between human and robotic teleoperation, examining practical aspects such as setup time and flexibility and experimentally comparing performance metrics such as completion time, position tracking, and force consistency. It is found that human teleoperation does not lead to statistically significant differences in completion time or position accuracy, with mean differences of 1.8% and 0.5%, respectively, and provides more consistent force application despite being substantially more practical and accessible.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。