ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Barriers to safety and efficiency in robotic surgery docking.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery for patients with obesity: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.ANZ journal of surgery · 2025Pooled it
- [Anesthesia for robot-assisted surgery].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2026Review
- Article
- Robotic-Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty: Implications for Surgical Practice and Operating Theatre Design.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Preliminary validity evidence for a platform-specific assessment tool for robotic setup and docking.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Device-related malfunctions and associated patient harm in robotic-assisted hysterectomy: a 17-year review of the FDA MAUDE database.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic-assisted bariatric surgery in medical tourism: a retrospective descriptive study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Observational
- Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery in colorectal cancer management: a narrative review of clinical efficacy and multidisciplinary integration.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE) vs. Conventional Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (MIE) for Esophageal Cancer: A Nationwide Inpatient Sample Analysis from 2017 to 2020.Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia · 2025Article
- Rethinking Surgical Safety: Investigating the Impact of Gamified Training on Severe Flow Disruptions in Surgery.Journal of patient safety · 2024Article
- Human Factors Integration in Robotic Surgery.Human factors · 2024Review
- Workflow disruptions in robot-assisted surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Review
- Automatic patient positioning based on robot rotational workspace for extended reality.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2023Article
- Improving Operating Room Efficiency of Robotic-Assisted Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Through Standardization.Obesity surgery · 2023Article
- Demands of surgical teams in robotic-assisted surgery: An assessment of intraoperative workload within different surgical specialties.American journal of surgery · 2023Article
- Identifying Workflow Disruptions in Robotic-Assisted Bariatric Surgery: Elucidating Challenges Experienced by Surgical Teams.Obesity surgery · 2023Observational
- Factors affecting workflow in robot-assisted surgery: a scoping review.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Is non-stop always better? Examining assumptions behind the concept of flow disruptions in studies of robot-assisted surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- Room Size Influences Flow in Robotic-Assisted Surgery.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- 'Rise of the Machines': Human Factors and training for robotic-assisted surgery.BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe introduction of new technology into the operating room (OR) can be beneficial for patients, but can also create new problems and complexities for physicians and staff. The observation of flow disruptions (FDs)-small deviations from the optimal course of care-can be used to understand how systems problems manifest. Prior studies showed that the docking process in robotic assisted surgery (RAS), which requires careful management of process, people, technology and working environment, might be a particularly challenging part of the operation. We sought to explore variation across multiple clinical sites and procedures; and to examine the sources of those disruptions.
methodsTrained observers recorded FDs during 45 procedures across multiple specialties at three different hospitals. The rate of FDs was compared across surgical phases, sites, and types of procedure. A work-system flow of the RAS docking procedure was used to determine which steps were most disrupted.
resultsThe docking process was significantly more disrupted than other procedural phases, with no effect of hospital site, and a potential interaction with procedure type. Particular challenges were encountered in room organization, retrieval of supplies, positioning the patient, and maneuvering the robot.
conclusionsDirect observation of surgical procedures can help to identify approaches to improve the design of technology and procedures, the training of staff, and configuration of the OR environment, with the eventual goal of improving safety, efficiency and teamwork in high technology surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.