Literature DB >> 32304167

A systematic review of the true benefit of robotic surgery: Ergonomics.

Ian Jun Yan Wee1, Li-Jen Kuo2, James Chi-Yong Ngu3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Ergonomics, as defined by the optimization of one's physical environment to enhance work performance, is an important consideration in surgery. While there have been reviews on the ergonomics of laparoscopy, this has not been the case for robotic surgery despite the rising number of publications.
METHODS: This study was performed in accordance to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A search was performed on main databases to identify relevant articles.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine articles were included, comprising 3074 participants. Studies employing objective measurement tools showed that robotics conferred superior ergonomic benefits and reduced work load compared to laparoscopy, for both surgeons and trainees. Survey studies also demonstrated that self-reported discomfort was lower in robotic procedures compared to laparoscopy and open surgery. Compared to other subspecialities, gynecological procedures seem to be associated with greater surgeon-reported strain.
CONCLUSION: Robotic surgery is ergonomically superior to open and laparoscopic surgery. However, rates of physical strain remain significant and should be addressed by formal ergonomic training and adequate console familiarization.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ergonomics; laparoscopy; robotics

Year:  2020        PMID: 32304167     DOI: 10.1002/rcs.2113

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Med Robot        ISSN: 1478-5951            Impact factor:   2.547


  7 in total

1.  Implementation of robotic rectal cancer surgery: a cross-sectional nationwide study.

Authors:  L J X Giesen; J W T Dekker; M Verseveld; R M P H Crolla; G P van der Schelling; C Verhoef; P B Olthof
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-08-30       Impact factor: 3.453

Review 2.  Robotic Surgery for Biliary Tract Cancer.

Authors:  Lyonell B Kone; Philip V Bystrom; Ajay V Maker
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-18       Impact factor: 6.639

3.  A possible revival of population-representing digital human manikins in static work situations - exemplified through an evaluation of a prototype console for robotic surgery.

Authors:  Ida-Märta Rhén; Xuelong Fan; Magnus Kjellman; Mikael Forsman
Journal:  Work       Date:  2021

4.  Minimally-invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomies with vascular resection: A 1:1 propensity-matched comparison study.

Authors:  Edwin Yang; Yvette Chong; Zhongkai Wang; Ye-Xin Koh; Kai-Inn Lim; Brian K P Goh
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2022 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.018

5.  Safe implementation of hand held steerable laparoscopic instruments: a survey among EAES surgeons.

Authors:  S F Hardon; A M Rahimi; R R Postema; E Willuth; Y Mintz; A Arezzo; J Dankelman; F Nickel; T Horeman
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2022-04-13

6.  Single-docking robotic-assisted artery-guided segmental splenic flexure colectomy for splenic flexure cancer-a propensity score-matching analysis.

Authors:  Tao Zhang; Zijia Song; Yaqi Zhang; Xiaopin Ji; Xiaoqian Jing; Yi Shi; Xi Cheng; Ren Zhao
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2021-06

7.  Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a case-control study.

Authors:  Jan Grosek; Jurij Ales Kosir; Primoz Sever; Vanja Erculj; Ales Tomazic
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2021-05-31       Impact factor: 2.991

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.