skip to main content
10.1145/3472301.3484350acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesihcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Gesture-based Interaction Systems in Hospital Critical Environment: Challenges and Recommendations for Gesture Creation

Published:18 October 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Gesture interfaces contribute to touchless interaction in systems inserted in critical hospital environments such as surgery rooms and intensive care units, among other areas where infection care is essential. However, defining a vocabulary of gestures that is adequate to this environment's physical characteristics, the sensors used, and the tasks performed by users while interacting is a challenge for developers. Methodologies and guidelines proposed in the literature to the gestures definition do not consider the characteristics of the critical environment, causing natural and innovative interaction to fail by not meeting the user's need. In this sense, our paper discusses the main challenges imposed by critical environments in gesture interaction development. As a result, we propose a set of recommendations that can contribute to developers of gesture interaction systems. Moreover, our research highlights and promotes a discussion about the need to develop specific methodologies to the critical environment context that supports the definition of gesture vocabulary.

References

  1. Patrícia Caetano Gattás Bara. 2019. O ambiente da sala de hemodiálise: Estudos de casos em Juiz de Fora. Master's thesis. Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrew Bragdon, Eugene Nelson, Yang Li, and Ken Hinckley. 2011. Experimental Analysis of Touch-Screen Gesture Designs in Mobile Environments. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (CHI '11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 403--412. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979000Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Brasil. 2002. Resolução - RDC N° 50. Ministério da Saúde. http://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/anvisa/2002/rdc0050_21_02_2002.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Brasil. 2012. Segurança do paciente em serviços de saúde: limpeza e desinfecção de superfícies. Technical Report. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Brasil. 2019. Medidas simples podem evitar infecção hospitalar. Ministério da Saúde. http://www.blog.saude.gov.br/yoxvlrGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Seán Cronin and Gavin Doherty. 2019. Touchless computer interfaces in hospitals: A review. Health Informatics Journal 25, 4 (2019), 1325--1342. https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458217748342Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Lucineide Rodrigues da Silva, Laura Sánchez Garcia, and Luciano Silva. 2014. Gesture Vocabulary for Natural Interaction with Virtual Museums - Case Study: A Process Created and Tested Within a Bilingual Deaf Children School. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 2: ICEIS. INSTICC, SciTePress, 5--13. https://doi.org/10.5220/0004886700050013Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Tereza Cristina Marques Dalla. 2003. Estudo da Qualidade do Ambiente Hospitalar como Contribuição na Recuperação de Pacientes. Master's thesis. Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Alan Lopes de Sousa Freitas, Vinícius Paes de Camargo, Heloise Manica Paris Teixeira, Renato Balancieri, and Thelma Elita Colanzi. 2017. Gesture and Voice-Based Natural User Interface for Electronic Whiteboard System in a Medical Emergency Department. In Proceedings of the XVI Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Joinville, Brazil) (IHC 2017). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3160504.3160534Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Sukeshini A. Grandhi, Gina Joue, and Irene Mittelberg. 2011. Understanding Naturalness and Intuitiveness in Gesture Production: Insights for Touchless Gestural Interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (CHI '11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 821--824. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979061Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Tibor Guzsvinecz, Veronika Szucs, and Cecilia Sik-Lanyi. 2019. Suitability of the Kinect Sensor and Leap Motion Controller---A Literature Review. Sensors 19, 5 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/s19051072Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Niels Henze, Andreas Löcken, Susanne Boll, Tobias Hesselmann, and Martin Pielot. 2010. Free-Hand Gestures for Music Playback: Deriving Gestures with a User-Centred Process. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia (Limassol, Cyprus) (MUM '10). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/1899475.1899491Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Mithun George Jacob and Juan Pablo Wachs. 2014. Context-based hand gesture recognition for the operating room. Pattern Recognition Letters 36 (2014), 196--203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2013.05.024Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. David Louis M. Achacon Jr., Denise M. Carlos, Maryann Kaye Puyaoan, Christine T. Clarin, and Prospero C. Naval. 2009. REALISM: Real-Time Hand Gesture Interface for Surgeons and Medical Experts. 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. K. Khoshelham. 2011. Accuracy Analysis of Kinect Depth Data. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences XXXVIII-5/W12 (2011), 133--138. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprsarchives-XXXVIII-5-W12-133-2011Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Artur Henrique Kronbauer. 2017. Natural and Multimodal Interactions: An Empirical Study. In Proceedings of the XVI Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Joinville, Brazil) (IHC 2017). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3160504.3160540Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Larry Li. 2014. Time-of-Flight Camera - An Introduction. Technical Report. Texas Instruments.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. André Mewes, Bennet Hensen, Frank Wacker, and Christian Hansen. 2017. Touchless interaction with software in interventional radiology and surgery: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery 12 (2017), 291--305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-016-1480-6Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Lou Michel. 1996. Light: the shape of the space. VNR.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Microsoft. [n.d.]. Kinect para Windows. https://developer.microsoft.com/pt-br/windows/kinect/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Michael Nielsen, Moritz Störring, Thomas B. Moeslund, and Erik Granum. 2004. A Procedure for Developing Intuitive and Ergonomic Gesture Interfaces for HCI. In Gesture-Based Communication in Human-Computer Interaction, Antonio Camurri and Gualtiero Volpe (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 409--420.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. World Health Organization. [n.d.]. Health care-associated infections - FACT SHEET. https://www.who.int/gpsc/country_work/gpsc_ccisc_fact_sheet_en.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Kenton O'Hara, Gerardo Gonzalez, Graeme Penney, Abigail Sellen, Robert Corish, Helena Mentis, Andreas Varnavas, Antonio Criminisi, Mark Rouncefield, Neville Dastur, and Tom Carrell. 2014. Interactional Order and Constructed Ways of Seeing with Touchless Imaging Systems in Surgery. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 23 (2014), 299--337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-014-9203-4Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Julien Pauchot, Laetitia Di Tommaso, Ahmed Lounis, Mourad Benassarou, Pierre Mathieu, and Dominique Bernot ans Sébastien Aubry. 2015. Leap Motion Gesture Control With Carestream Software in the Operating Room to Control Imaging: Installation Guide and Discussion. Surgical Innovation 22, 6 (2015), 615--620. https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350615587992Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Adriana Peccin. 2002. Iluminação Hospitalar. Estudo de Caso: Espaços de Internação e Recuperação. Master's thesis. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Guillermo M Rosa and María L Elizondo. 2014. Use of a gesture user interface as a touchless image navigation system in dental surgery: Case series report. Imaging Science in Dentistry 44, 2 (2014), 155--160. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2014.44.2.155Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. William A. Rutala, Matthew S. White, Maria F. Gergen, and David J. Weber. 2006. Bacterial contamination of keyboards: efficacy and functional impact of disinfectants. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 27, 4 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1086/503340Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Ben Shneiderman, Catherine Plaisant, Maxine S. Cohen, Steven Jacobs, Niklas Elmqvist, and Nicholas Diakopoulos. 2016. Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction. Pearson.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Ramon A. Suárez Fernández, Jose Luis Sanchez-Lopez, Carlos Sampedro, Hriday Bavle, Martin Molina, and Pascual Campoy. 2016. Natural user interfaces for human-drone multi-modal interaction. In 2016 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS). 1013--1022. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICUAS.2016.7502665Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Ultraleap. [n.d.]. Leap Motion Controller. https://www.ultraleap.com/product/leap-motion-controller/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Juan Pablo Wachs, Mathias Kölsch, Helman Stern, and Yael Edan. 2011. Vision-Based Hand-Gesture Applications. Commun. ACM 54, 2 (Feb. 2011), 60--71. https://doi.org/10.1145/1897816.1897838Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Frank Weichert, Daniel Bachmann, Bartholomäus Rudak, and Denis Fisseler. 2013. Analysis of the Accuracy and Robustness of the Leap Motion Controller. Sensors 13, 5 (2013), 6380--6393. https://doi.org/10.3390/s130506380Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Antoine Widmer, Roger Schaer, Dimitrios Markonis, and Henning Müller. 2014. Gesture Interaction for Content-Based Medical Image Retrieval. In Proceedings of International Conference on Multimedia Retrieval (Glasgow, United Kingdom) (ICMR '14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 503--506. https://doi.org/10.1145/2578726.2578804Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Gesture-based Interaction Systems in Hospital Critical Environment: Challenges and Recommendations for Gesture Creation

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      IHC '21: Proceedings of the XX Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      October 2021
      523 pages
      ISBN:9781450386173
      DOI:10.1145/3472301

      Copyright © 2021 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 18 October 2021

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      IHC '21 Paper Acceptance Rate29of77submissions,38%Overall Acceptance Rate331of973submissions,34%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader