Literature DB >> 22914886

Rating and issues of mechanical anastomotic staplers in surgical practice: a survey of 241 Japanese gastroenterological surgeons.

Emiko Kono1, Yasuko Tomizawa, Tomoko Matsuo, Sachiyo Nomura.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Commercially available mechanical devices for gastrointestinal anastomosis are mostly made in overseas. Japanese female surgeons have described these devices as being too large and difficult to handle. This study investigated the degree of satisfaction and problems experienced by Japanese surgeons in using various staplers for mechanical anastomosis.
METHODS: A questionnaire was prepared and sent via email to 5,537 members of the Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery. The questionnaire included sex, age, surgical glove size, degree of satisfaction with various mechanical staplers, stress felt when using the staplers in anastomosis, and problems regarding the devices.
RESULTS: Valid responses were received from 241 respondents (167 males, 74 females, response rate 4.9 %). The satisfaction rate ranged from 0 to 100 %. The average glove size in males was significantly larger than that in females (median: 7.0 versus 6.0; P < 0.0001). Surgeons with glove size 6.0 or smaller felt stress more frequently than those with size 6.5 or larger (median: 40 vs. 20 %; P < 0.0001). Surgeons with glove size 6.0 and smaller experienced more difficulties during firing and releasing.
CONCLUSION: The satisfaction rates with currently available mechanical staplers were low. Japanese surgeons with small hands felt more stress when using the staplers. Ergonometric consideration is necessary in stapler design.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22914886     DOI: 10.1007/s00595-012-0303-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Today        ISSN: 0941-1291            Impact factor:   2.549


  15 in total

1.  Improvement of the laparoscopic needle holder based on new ergonomic guidelines.

Authors:  M A van Veelen; D W Meijer; I Uijttewaal; R H M Goossens; C J Snijders; G Kazemier
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-03-06       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Laparoscopic virtual reality and box trainers: is one superior to the other?

Authors:  Y Munz; B D Kumar; K Moorthy; S Bann; A Darzi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-02-02       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study.

Authors:  Neal E Seymour; Anthony G Gallagher; Sanziana A Roman; Michael K O'Brien; Vipin K Bansal; Dana K Andersen; Richard M Satava
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Ergonomic aspects of five different types of laparoscopic instrument handles under dynamic conditions with respect to specific laparoscopic tasks: an electromyographic-based study.

Authors:  U Matern; G Kuttler; C Giebmeyer; P Waller; M Faist
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-06-23       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 5.  Minimally invasive surgery for gastric tumors.

Authors:  Seigo Kitano; Norio Shiraishi
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 2.741

6.  [Current status of support for female doctors in the specialist medical societies of the Japanese Association of Medical Sciences: results of a questionnaire survey].

Authors:  Yasuko Tomizawa; Kazumi Kawase; Kyoko Yorozuya; Yasuhiro Nagata; Tatsuo Teramoto
Journal:  Nihon Geka Gakkai Zasshi       Date:  2009-05

7.  Experience in the application of the instrumental mechanical suture in surgery of the stomach and rectum.

Authors:  P I Androsov
Journal:  Acta Chir Scand       Date:  1970

8.  Human factors and the FDA's goals: improved medical device design.

Authors:  D B Burlington
Journal:  Biomed Instrum Technol       Date:  1996 Mar-Apr

9.  The relationship between hand size and difficulty using surgical instruments: a survey of 726 laparoscopic surgeons.

Authors:  R Berguer; A Hreljac
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-02-02       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Randomized clinical trial of virtual reality simulation for laparoscopic skills training.

Authors:  T P Grantcharov; V B Kristiansen; J Bendix; L Bardram; J Rosenberg; P Funch-Jensen
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 6.939

View more
  6 in total

1.  Enhancing the precision of circular stapled colorectal anastomosis: could powered stapler technology provide the solution?

Authors:  R Mirnezami; A Soares; M Chand
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 2.  A Woman's Place Is in Theatre, but Are Theatres Designed with Women in Mind? A Systematic Review of Ergonomics for Women in Surgery.

Authors:  Maria Irene Bellini; Maria Ida Amabile; Paolina Saullo; Noemi Zorzetti; Mario Testini; Roberto Caronna; Vito D'Andrea
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-06-18       Impact factor: 4.964

3.  Indirect comparison between powered and manual circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomoses: clinical and economic outcomes in China.

Authors:  Junwei Bai; Yingnan Zhao; Hong Liang; Junmeng Li; Chao Zhang
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2022-08-31

4.  Economic Analysis of Leak Complications in Anastomoses Performed with Powered versus Manual Circular Staplers in Left-Sided Colorectal Resections: A US-Based Cost Analysis.

Authors:  Esther Pollack; Stephen Johnston; William J Petraiuolo; Sanjoy Roy; Thibaut Galvain
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2021-06-17

5.  Ergonomic evaluation of a mechanical anastomotic stapler used by Japanese surgeons.

Authors:  Emiko Kono; Mitsunori Tada; Makiko Kouchi; Yui Endo; Yasuko Tomizawa; Tomoko Matsuo; Sachiyo Nomura
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2013-07-27       Impact factor: 2.549

6.  Outcomes associated with the use of a new powered circular stapler for left-sided colorectal reconstructions: a propensity score matching-adjusted indirect comparison with manual circular staplers.

Authors:  Patricia Sylla; Peter Sagar; Stephen S Johnston; Harikumaran R Dwarakanathan; Jason R Waggoner; Michael Schwiers; Sanjoy Roy
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 4.584

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.