Semi-Robotic Alignment Workflow for Medical Systems

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Robotic systems in medical settings face challenges in safely transitioning from manual coarse-adjustment to automated fine-adjustment modes, often disrupting surgical workflows and risking tool position alterations due to the need for physical switches, which can be obstructed or inconveniently located.

Innovation Solution

A method that determines control data for automated movement of a robotic system by acquiring image data of anatomical structures, planning tool positions, tracking actual positions, and switching between manual and automated modes without physical switch interaction, using a computer to generate instructions for actuators to move tools along optimized trajectories while avoiding critical structures.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If a physical switch is used to authorize movement of the fine-adjustment unit, then safety in fault scenarios is improved, but surgical workflow is interrupted and the switch may be obstructed or inconveniently located

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety in fault scenariosVSAvoidsurgical workflow continuity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces the mechanical physical switch system with an automated sensor-based detection system. The system uses sensors to detect the position of the holding arm and automatically determines when coarse-adjustment is complete, eliminating the need for manual switch activation. This substitution maintains safety through automated status monitoring while removing workflow interruptions caused by physical switch interaction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs self-monitoring and self-transition between operational modes. The holding arm's position sensors automatically detect when the arm has reached its target position during coarse-adjustment, and the system autonomously transitions to fine-adjustment mode without requiring user intervention. This self-service approach maintains safety through continuous status monitoring while eliminating workflow interruptions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Ease of operation

If the physical switch is located close to the tool held by the holding arm, then ease of activation is improved, but the tool position may be altered during switch actuation

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of switch activationVSAvoidtool position accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual switch actuation with automated sensor-based detection. Sensors mounted on the holding arm detect the arm's position and determine when coarse-adjustment is complete, eliminating the need for manual switch activation near the tool. This substitution maintains ease of operation through intuitive sensor-based detection while preserving tool position accuracy by removing manual interference.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Manufacturing precision

If the physical switch is located at the end of the holding arm opposite to the tool, then tool position stability is improved, but draping may obstruct the switch

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetool position stabilityVSAvoidswitch accessibility
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces the mechanical switch system with automated sensors distributed along the holding arm. These sensors detect the arm's position without requiring manual activation, eliminating the need for switch placement considerations related to draping obstruction. This substitution maintains tool position stability through continuous sensor monitoring while improving accessibility by removing the need for manual switch activation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

4Measurement precision

If manual coarse-adjustment is followed by automated fine-adjustment, then positioning precision is improved, but the transition between modes requires user intervention that interrupts workflow

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepositioning precisionVSAvoidworkflow efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system automatically monitors the holding arm's position through sensors and autonomously determines when coarse-adjustment is complete. The system self-transitions from coarse-adjustment to fine-adjustment mode without requiring user intervention, maintaining high positioning precision through automated mode switching while eliminating workflow interruptions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses sensor feedback to continuously monitor the holding arm's position and automatically trigger the transition between coarse-adjustment and fine-adjustment modes. This feedback mechanism ensures precise positioning by maintaining appropriate control modes while improving workflow efficiency through automated transitions that eliminate user intervention.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentEP3313314B1Optimized semi-robotic alignment workflow
Publication Date: 2020.04.29 BRAINLAB AG
  • EP3313314B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3313314B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3313314B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

Disclosed is a medical data processing method for determining control data for an automated movement of a robotic system (1) to move a tool operatively associated with the robotic system (1), wherein the method comprises executing, on at least one processor of at least one computer (4), steps of: a) acquiring (S1) image data describing an image of an anatomical structure of a patient; b) determining (S2) planned position data, based on the image data, describing at least one planned position of the tool relative to the anatomical structure of the patient; c) acquiring (S3) status change data describing the change of a status of the robotic system (1) from a first status to a second status, wherein in the first status a manual movement of at least one part of the robotic system (1) is allowed and in the second status a manual movement of the at least one part of the robotic system is inhibited; d) acquiring (S4) actual position data describing the actual position of an element of the robotic system, in particular the tool, relative to the anatomical structure; e) determining (S5), based on the planned position data and the status change data and the actual position data, control data describing instructions for controlling, in the second status of the robotic system (1), at least one actuator to move the tool.