Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30350099›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019

Ergonomic analysis of laparoscopic and robotic surgical task performance at various experience levels.

Jorge G Zárate Rodriguez, Ahmed M Zihni, Ikechukwu Ohu, Jaime A Cavallo, Shuddhadeb Ray, Sohyung Cho, Michael M Awad

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 30 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Jorge G Zárate RodriguezWashington University in Saint Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. j.zarate@wustl.edu.
Ahmed M ZihniProvidence Portland Medical Center, Portland, OR, USA.
Ikechukwu OhuGannon University, Erie, PA, USA.
Jaime A CavalloIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Shuddhadeb RayWashington University in Saint Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Sohyung ChoSouthern Illinois University, Edwardsville, IL, USA.
Michael M AwadWashington University in Saint Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Washington University in St. Louis · USGannon University · USIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · USProvidence Portland Medical Center · USSouthern Illinois University Edwardsville · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTraditional laparoscopic surgery (TLS) has increasingly been associated with physical muscle strain for the operating surgeon. Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) may offer improved ergonomics. Ergonomics for the surgeon on these two platforms can be compared using surface electromyography (sEMG) to measure muscle activation, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NTLX) survey to assess workload subjectively.

methodsSubjects were recruited and divided into groups according to level of expertise in traditional laparoscopic (TLS) and robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS): novice, traditional laparoscopic surgeons (TL surgeons), robot-assisted laparoscopic surgeons (RAL surgeons). Each subject performed three fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery (FLS) tasks in randomized order while sEMG data were obtained from bilateral biceps, triceps, deltoid, and trapezius muscles. After completing all tasks, subjects completed the NTLX survey. sEMG data normalized to the maximum voluntary contraction of each muscle (MVC%), and NTLX data were compared with unpaired t tests and considered significant with a p ≤ 0.05.

resultsMuscle activation was higher during TLS compared to RALS in most muscle groups for novices except for the trapezius muscles. Muscle activation scores were also higher for TLS among the groups with more experience, but the differences were less significant. NTLX scores were higher for the TLS platform compared to the RALS platform for novices. DISCUSSION: TLS is associated with higher muscle activation in all muscle groups except for trapezius muscles, suggesting greater strain on the surgeon. Increased trapezius muscle activation on RALS has previously been documented and is likely due to the position of the eye piece. The differences seen in muscle activation diminish with increasing levels of expertise. Experience likely mitigates the ergonomic disadvantage of TLS. NTLX survey data suggest there are subjective benefits to RALS, namely in the perception of temporal demand. Further research to correlate NTLX data and sEMG measurements, and to investigate whether these metrics affect patient outcomes is warranted.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceErgonomicsLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresElectromyographyHumansMuscle ContractionMuscle, SkeletalStress, PhysiologicalSurgeonsErgonomicsLaparoscopic surgeryRobot-assisted laparoscopic surgery

Identifiers

PMID30350099
OpenAlexW2896271068

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.