Literature DB >> 27495330

Intraoperative workload in robotic surgery assessed by wearable motion tracking sensors and questionnaires.

Denny Yu1,2, Cem Dural3, Melissa M B Morrow1,2, Liyun Yang3, Justin W Collins4, Susan Hallbeck5,6, Magnus Kjellman3, Mikael Forsman3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The introduction of robotic technology has revolutionized radical prostatectomy surgery. However, the potential benefits of robotic techniques may have trade-offs in increased mental demand for the surgeon and the physical demand for the assisting surgeon. This study employed an innovative motion tracking tool along with validated workload questionnaire to assess the ergonomics and workload for both assisting and console surgeons intraoperatively.
METHODS: Fifteen RARP cases were collected in this study. Cases were performed by 10 different participants, six primarily performed console tasks and four primarily performed assisting tasks. Participants had a median 12 (min-3, max-25) years of surgical experience. Both console and assisting surgeons performed robotic prostatectomy cases while wearing inertial measurement units (IMUs) that continuously track neck, shoulder, and torso motion without interfering with the sterile environment. Postoperatively, participants completed a workload questionnaire (SURG-TLX) and a body part discomfort questionnaire.
RESULTS: Twenty-six questionnaires were completed from 13 assisting and 13 console surgeons over the 15 cases. Postoperative pain was reported highest for the right shoulder and neck. Mental demands were 41 % higher for surgeons at the console than assisting (p < 0.05), while physical demands were not significantly different. Assisting surgeons worked in demanding neck postures for 58 % of the procedure compared to 24 % for the console surgeon (p < 0.01). Surgeons at the console were primarily static and showed 2-5 times fewer movements than assisting surgeons (p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Postures were more ergonomic during console tasks than when assisting by the bedside; however, the console may constrain postures leading to static loads that have been associated with musculoskeletal symptoms for the neck, torso, and shoulders. The IMU sensors were effective at quantifying ergonomics in robotic prostatectomies, and these methods and findings have broad applications to other robotic procedures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ergonomics; Robotic surgery; Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy; Workload

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27495330     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-5047-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  47 in total

1.  Physical workload on neck and upper limb using two CAD applications.

Authors:  Jeannette Unge Byström; Gert-Ake Hansson; Lars Rylander; Kerstina Ohlsson; Gabriella Källrot; Staffan Skerfving
Journal:  Appl Ergon       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 3.661

Review 2.  Robot-assisted abdominal surgery.

Authors:  C N Gutt; T Oniu; A Mehrabi; A Kashfi; P Schemmer; M W Büchler
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 6.939

Review 3.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Vincenzo Ficarra; Giacomo Novara; Thomas E Ahlering; Anthony Costello; James A Eastham; Markus Graefen; Giorgio Guazzoni; Mani Menon; Alexandre Mottrie; Vipul R Patel; Henk Van der Poel; Raymond C Rosen; Ashutosh K Tewari; Timothy G Wilson; Filiberto Zattoni; Francesco Montorsi
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Ergonomics considerations of radical prostatectomy: physician perspective of open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted techniques.

Authors:  Aditya Bagrodia; Jay D Raman
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 2.942

5.  Surgery-related complications in 1253 robot-assisted and 485 open retropubic radical prostatectomies at the Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden.

Authors:  Stefan Carlsson; Andreas E Nilsson; Martin C Schumacher; Martin N Jonsson; Daniela S Volz; Gunnar Steineck; Peter N Wiklund
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Lateral epicondylitis: new evidence for work relatedness.

Authors:  Alexis Descatha; Ann Marie Dale; Barbara A Silverstein; Yves Roquelaure; David Rempel
Journal:  Joint Bone Spine       Date:  2014-12-29       Impact factor: 4.929

Review 7.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Vincenzo Ficarra; Giacomo Novara; Raymond C Rosen; Walter Artibani; Peter R Carroll; Anthony Costello; Mani Menon; Francesco Montorsi; Vipul R Patel; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg; Henk Van der Poel; Timothy G Wilson; Filiberto Zattoni; Alexandre Mottrie
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Patients benefit while surgeons suffer: an impending epidemic.

Authors:  Adrian Park; Gyusung Lee; F Jacob Seagull; Nora Meenaghan; David Dexter
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2009-12-24       Impact factor: 6.113

9.  Musculoskeletal occupational injury among surgeons: effects for patients, providers, and institutions.

Authors:  William T Davis; Sarah A Fletcher; Oscar D Guillamondegui
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 2.192

10.  Effect of alternative video displays on postures, perceived effort, and performance during microsurgery skill tasks.

Authors:  Denny Yu; Cooper Green; Steven J Kasten; Michael E Sackllah; Thomas J Armstrong
Journal:  Appl Ergon       Date:  2015-11-14       Impact factor: 3.661

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  Work-system interventions in robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review exploring the gap between challenges and solutions.

Authors:  Falisha Kanji; Ken Catchpole; Eunice Choi; Myrtede Alfred; Kate Cohen; Daniel Shouhed; Jennifer Anger; Tara Cohen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Analysis of the posture pattern during robotic simulator tasks using an optical motion capture system.

Authors:  Kenta Takayasu; Kenji Yoshida; Takao Mishima; Masato Watanabe; Tadashi Matsuda; Hidefumi Kinoshita
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-06-29       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Effects of Flow Disruptions on Mental Workload and Surgical Performance in Robotic-Assisted Surgery.

Authors:  Jeannette Weber; Ken Catchpole; Armin J Becker; Boris Schlenker; Matthias Weigl
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 4.  Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Health of the Surgeon.

Authors:  Andrew T Schlussel; Justin A Maykel
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2019-08-22

5.  Systematic review of measurement tools to assess surgeons' intraoperative cognitive workload.

Authors:  R D Dias; M C Ngo-Howard; M T Boskovski; M A Zenati; S J Yule
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2018-02-21       Impact factor: 6.939

6.  Surgeons' physical workload in open surgery versus robot-assisted surgery and nonsurgical tasks.

Authors:  Xuelong Fan; Mikael Forsman; Liyun Yang; Carl M Lind; Magnus Kjellman
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Human factors in robotic assisted surgery: Lessons from studies 'in the Wild'.

Authors:  Ken Catchpole; Ann Bisantz; M Susan Hallbeck; Matthias Weigl; Rebecca Randell; Merrick Kossack; Jennifer T Anger
Journal:  Appl Ergon       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 3.661

8.  A kinematic posture analysis of neurological assistants in their daily working practice-a pilot study.

Authors:  Bijanzadeh Anne; Hermanns Ingo; Ellegast Rolf; Laura Fraeulin; Holzgreve Fabian; Stefanie Mache; David A Groneberg; Ohlendorf Daniela
Journal:  J Occup Med Toxicol       Date:  2020-12-09       Impact factor: 2.646

Review 9.  Non-Technical Skill Assessment and Mental Load Evaluation in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery.

Authors:  Renáta Nagyné Elek; Tamás Haidegger
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-10       Impact factor: 3.576

10.  Eye-Tracking Metrics Predict Perceived Workload in Robotic Surgical Skills Training.

Authors:  Chuhao Wu; Jackie Cha; Jay Sulek; Tian Zhou; Chandru P Sundaram; Juan Wachs; Denny Yu
Journal:  Hum Factors       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 2.888

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.