Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27924389›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2017

Which causes more ergonomic stress: Laparoscopic or open surgery?

Robert Wang, Zhe Liang, Ahmed M Zihni, Shuddhadeb Ray, Michael M Awad

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Robert WangDepartment of Surgery, Section of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, USA.
Zhe LiangDepartment of Surgery, Section of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, USA.
Ahmed M ZihniDepartment of Surgery, Section of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, USA. zihnia@wudosis.wustl.edu.
Shuddhadeb RayDepartment of Surgery, Section of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, USA.
Michael M AwadDepartment of Surgery, Section of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, USA.
Washington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere 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.

methodsWe 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).

resultsSignificant 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).

conclusionsContrary 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.

Indexed as

ErgonomicsLaparoscopyAdultColectomyElectromyographyFemaleHumansMaleMuscle, SkeletalSigmoid DiseasesStress, PhysiologicalErgonomicsHuman factorsLaparoscopic surgeryOpen surgerySurgical task performance

Identifiers

PMID27924389
OpenAlexW2560597069

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.