Table 9.

Comparison of different interfaces for scope control, by year

Study & year	Interfaces	Robotic system	Comparators	Observation
Allaf, Jackman [19] (1998)	Voice & foot	AESOP 2000	Mean task completion time, operator-interface failure per trial, & durability of learning experience retained over two weeks	Foot control was preferred over voice Voice commands were misinterpreted, whereas foot control was quick & easier to learn (p < 0.002)
Mettler, Ibrahim [151] (1998)	Feet, hand & voice	AESOP 2000	Operating time length	Voice control was favored over foot & hand controls Foot pedal was preferred over hand control as it freed surgeon’s arms
Berkelman, Cinquin [18] (2005)	Voice & hand	ViKY	Surgeon’s evaluation of user commands	Voice command was preferred over keypad mounted on scope
Gumbs, Crovari [21] (2007)	Voice & foot	ViKY & AESOP 3000	Average setup time, repetition of commands, occurrence of errant commands	Foot pedal was preferred over voice by surgeons Voice commands were likely to be misheard, while there was no chance for misinterpreted commands with foot pedals. Better setup and removal time was observed for ViKY (p < 0.001)
Mirbagheri, Farahmand [20] (2011)	Voice & foot	RoboLens	Procedure completion time, need for cleaning, image stability, procedure field centering, surgeon’s evaluation of interface	Foot control was preferred over voice by surgeons Voice recognition was affected by pronunciation, and significant lag was observed between voice command and scope movement
Kranzfelder, Schneider [152] (2014)	Feet, voice & eye	–	Surgeon’s evaluation	As an addition to hand control, foot pedal was preferred over speech and eye tracking by surgeons & gastroenterologists (56%). More specialists preferred foot control than generalists
Avellino, Bailly [120] (2020)	Hand (joystick), body posture & tool tracking	–	Surgeon’s evaluation of stability, precision, cognitive load, and intuitiveness as criteria	Tool tracking was preferred Posture tracking may be considered for tasks that require short distance movement