Literature DB >> 25213855

[Minimal access surgery: A survey among surgeons in Central Germany].

A Weigt1, F Rauchfuss, Y Dittmar, U Settmacher, H Scheuerlein.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: A survey about perceptions concerning natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and single port operations (SPO) was conducted among medical professionals at hospitals in Central Germany. The identity of the participants remained anonymous. The focus was on the subjective perception of medical colleagues and included a statement of preferred methods if the medical professional would need to undergo surgery.
METHODS: Within a radius of 120 km of the city of Erfurt, all 150 surgical departments were approached and asked to complete a series of questionnaires containing general and personal questions. The analysis was performed according to the professional rank, age and sex of the participants. The questionnaires contained questions on patient preferences, cosmetic aspects and other factors, such as marketing, industry-driven, playful approach of the surgeon and appeal of a new procedure.
RESULTS: In total 83 surgical departments participated in the survey resulting in 432 eligible questionnaires. Of the participants 29 % were female, the average age was 44 years, 20 % were heads of departments, 37 % senior surgeons, 20 % specialist surgeons and 23 % residents. The proportion of conventional minimally invasive surgical procedures was on average 30 % of all surgical interventions. Two hospitals offered transvaginal hybrid NOTES (cholecystectomy), 45 % performed SPOs, 36 % of the participants agreed strongly or moderately with the concept of SPO and 34 % rejected NOTES. The factors industry-driven, promotion/marketing and appeal of a new procedure were evaluated as very important or relatively important by the majority of the participants (> 70 %). When evaluating the factor playful approach of the surgeon, the proportion was 55 %. The factor patient preferences was evaluated as very high or high by 25% of the participants while it had no impact on 8 % or only a minor impact on 36 %. In case of undergoing surgery themselves, conventional laparoscopy would be preferred and NOTES was rated last among all options.
CONCLUSION: The soft factors that were analyzed (i.e. marketing, industry-driven, playful approach of the surgeon and appeal of something new) were evaluated as much more important in the surgeons' opinion compared to patient criteria (i.e. patient preferences and cosmetic results). The soft factors are, however, not to be judged as generally negative as they are to a certain extent necessary (marketing), useful (impulses from industry) or are part of the surgical creativity (playfulness). The discrepancies in the medical professional evaluation of the different factors shows that the reasoning and the motivation of the actions are not necessarily identical.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25213855     DOI: 10.1007/s00104-014-2853-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chirurg        ISSN: 0009-4722            Impact factor:   0.955


  9 in total

1.  [NOTES--quo vadis?].

Authors:  J Jähne
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 0.955

2.  NOTES, the debate continues.

Authors:  K Slim; M V Launay-Savary
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-07-12       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  [Comparison between transvaginal and laparoscopic cholecystectomy - a retrospective case-control study].

Authors:  M Hensel; U Schernikau; A Schmidt; G Arlt
Journal:  Zentralbl Chir       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 0.942

4.  Inpatients and specialists' opinions about natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery.

Authors:  Dániel Gerö; Peter Lukovich; Bors Hulesch; Tímea Pálházy; Bence Kecskédi; Péter Kupcsulik
Journal:  Surg Technol Int       Date:  2010-04

5.  Laparoscopic colorectal surgery--are we being honest with our patients?

Authors:  S D Wexner; S M Cohen; A Ulrich; P Reissman
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 4.585

6.  Patient preferences for surgical techniques: should we invest in new approaches?

Authors:  Ahsan Rao; James Kynaston; Euan R MacDonald; Irfan Ahmed
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-05-19       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  [Perception of natural orifice surgery. Results of a survey of female physicians and nursing staff].

Authors:  T Benhidjeb; C Gericke; C Spies; K Miller; A Schneider; F Müller
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 0.955

8.  Single-incision and NOTES cholecystectomy, are there clinical or cosmetic advantages when compared to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A case-control study comparing single-incision, transvaginal, and conventional laparoscopic technique for cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Peter B van den Boezem; Simone Velthuis; Harm J Lourens; Miguel A Cuesta; Colin Sietses
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 3.352

9.  Perception of preference and risk-taking in laparoscopy, transgastric, and rigid-hybrid transvaginal NOTES for cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Michael C Sulz; Andreas Zerz; Markus Sagmeister; Thomas Roll; Christa Meyenberger
Journal:  Swiss Med Wkly       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 2.193

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.