Literature DB >> 27924389

Which causes more ergonomic stress: Laparoscopic or open surgery?

Robert Wang1, Zhe Liang1, Ahmed M Zihni2, Shuddhadeb Ray1, Michael M Awad1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is increasing awareness of potential ergonomic challenges experienced by the laparoscopic surgeon. The purpose of this study is to quantify and compare the ergonomic stress experienced by a surgeon while performing open versus laparoscopic portions of a procedure. We hypothesize that a surgeon will experience greater ergonomic stress when performing laparoscopic surgery.
METHODS: We designed a study to measure upper-body muscle activation during the laparoscopic and open portions of sigmoid colectomies in a single surgeon. A sample of five cases was recorded over a two-month time span. Each case contained significant portions of laparoscopic and open surgery. We obtained whole-case electromyography (EMG) tracings from bilateral biceps, triceps, deltoid, and trapezius muscles. After normalization to a maximum voltage of contraction (%MVC), these EMG tracings were used to calculate average muscle activation during the open and laparoscopic segments of each procedure. Paired Student's t test was used to compare the average muscle activation between the two groups (*p < 0.05 considered statistically significant).
RESULTS: Significant reductions in mean muscle activation in laparoscopic compared to open procedures were noted for the left triceps (4.07 ± 0.44% open vs. 2.65 ± 0.54% lap, 35% reduction), left deltoid (2.43 ± 0.45% open vs. 1.32 ± 0.16% lap, 46% reduction), left trapezius (9.93 ± 0.1.95% open vs. 4.61 ± 0.67% lap, 54% reduction), right triceps (2.94 ± 0.62% open vs. 1.85 ± 0.28% lap, 37% reduction), and right trapezius (10.20 ± 2.12% open vs. 4.69 ± 1.18% lap, 54% reduction).
CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to our hypothesis, the laparoscopic approach provided ergonomic benefit in several upper-body muscle groups compared to the open approach. This may be due to the greater reach of laparoscopic instruments and camera in the lower abdomen/pelvis. Patient body habitus may also have less of an effect in the laparoscopic compared to open approach. Future studies with multiple subjects and different types of procedures are planned to further investigate these findings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ergonomics; Human factors; Laparoscopic surgery; Open surgery; Surgical task performance

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27924389     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-5360-5

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


  23 in total

1.  Ergonomic problems associated with laparoscopic surgery.

Authors:  R Berguer; D L Forkey; W D Smith
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  A comparison of the physical effort required for laparoscopic and open surgical techniques.

Authors:  Ramon Berguer; Jerry Chen; Warren D Smith
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2003-09

3.  Comparative assessment of physical and cognitive ergonomics associated with robotic and traditional laparoscopic surgeries.

Authors:  Gyusung I Lee; Mija R Lee; Tameka Clanton; Tamera Clanton; Erica Sutton; Adrian E Park; Michael R Marohn
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Ergonomic risk associated with assisting in minimally invasive surgery.

Authors:  Gyusung Lee; Tommy Lee; David Dexter; Carlos Godinez; Nora Meenaghan; Robert Catania; Adrian Park
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-09-25       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 5.  Methodological infrastructure in surgical ergonomics: a review of tasks, models, and measurement systems.

Authors:  Gyusung Lee; Tommy Lee; David Dexter; Rosemary Klein; Adrian Park
Journal:  Surg Innov       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 2.058

6.  Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial.

Authors:  Ruben Veldkamp; Esther Kuhry; Wim C J Hop; J Jeekel; G Kazemier; H Jaap Bonjer; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio M Lacy
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 41.316

7.  Laparoscopic vs open inguinal hernia repair. A randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  C Tanphiphat; T Tanprayoon; C Sangsubhan; K Chatamra
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  NIH Consensus conference. Gallstones and laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1993-02-24       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  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

10.  Laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia mesh repair: a prospective study.

Authors:  D Lomanto; S G Iyer; A Shabbir; W-K Cheah
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-05-15       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  3 in total

1.  Effect of Patient Body Mass Index on Laparoscopic Surgical Ergonomics.

Authors:  Zhe Liang; William D Gerull; Robert Wang; Ahmed Zihni; Shuddhadeb Ray; Michael Awad
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 4.129

2.  Ergonomics of minimally invasive surgery: an analysis of muscle effort and fatigue in the operating room between laparoscopic and robotic surgery.

Authors:  Priscila R Armijo; Chun-Kai Huang; Robin High; Melissa Leon; Ka-Chun Siu; Dmitry Oleynikov
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-10-19       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Should All Minimal Access Surgery Be Robot-Assisted? A Systematic Review into the Musculoskeletal and Cognitive Demands of Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery.

Authors:  Abdul Shugaba; Joel E Lambert; Theodoros M Bampouras; Helen E Nuttall; Christopher J Gaffney; Daren A Subar
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2022-04-14       Impact factor: 3.267

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.