ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Ergonomic effects of medical augmented reality glasses in video-assisted surgery.
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 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intraoperative application of mixed and augmented reality for digital surgery: a systematic review of ethical issues.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Alterations in Physical Demands During Virtual/Augmented Reality-Based Tasks: A Systematic Review.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2023Pooled it
- Advances in objective assessment of ergonomics in endoscopic surgery: a review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Pooled it
- Designing Novel Visual Physiologic Monitor Displays for Patient Care.Human factors · 2026Article
- Article
- Augmented reality-assisted cholangioscopy for biliary interventions: initial clinical experience in four cases.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Electromyography in abdominal laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: A scoping review.PloS one · 2026Article
- Review
- Advances in Augmented Reality in Sports Surgery: A Systematic Review.Advances in orthopedics · 2025Review
- Application of a head-mounted augmented reality display for visualization in convexity meningioma resection: A technical note.Surgical neurology international · 2025Article
- Interventions to prevent visual fatigue during robotic surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Review
- Surgeon stress, anxiety, and workload: a descriptive study of participant reported responses to fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery exercises.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Role of eXtended Reality use in medical imaging interpretation for pre-surgical planning and intraoperative augmentation.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2024Review
- Augmented Reality in Dentistry: Enhancing Precision in Clinical Procedures-A Systematic Review.Clinics and practice · 2024Review
- [Modern individualized diagnostics and treatment of non-small cell lung cancer].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Can engineers represent surgeons in usability studies? Comparison of results from evaluating augmented reality guidance for laparoscopic surgery.Computers & graphics · 2024Article
- The value of Augmented Reality in surgery - A usability study on laparoscopic liver surgery.Medical image analysis · 2023Article
- The Impact of a Robotic Digital Microscope on the Ergonomics in a Neurosurgical Operating Theatre (A Single-Centre Experience).Acta neurochirurgica. Supplement · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence assisted display in thoracic surgery: development and possibilities.Journal of thoracic disease · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to objectively compare medical augmented reality glasses (ARG) and conventional monitors in video-assisted surgery and to systematically analyze its ergonomic benefits.
methodsThree surgeons (thoracic, laparoscopic, and thyroid surgeons) participated in the study. Six thoracoscopic metastasectomies, six subtotal laparoscopic gastrectomies, and six thyroidectomies were performed with and without ARG. The subjective experience was evaluated using a questionnaire-based NASA-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX). Postures during surgeries were recorded. The risk of musculoskeletal disorders associated with video-assisted surgery was assessed using rapid entire body assessment (REBA). Surface electromyography (EMG) was recorded. Muscle fatigue was objectively measured.
resultsNASA-TLX scores of three surgeons were lower when ARG was used compared to those with conventional monitor (66.4 versus 82.7). Less workload during surgery was reported with ARG. The laparoscopic surgeon exhibited a substantial decrease in mental and physical demand [- 21.1 and 12.5%)] and the thyroid surgeon did (- 40.0 and - 66.7%).Total REBA scores decreased with ARG (8 to 3.6). The risk of musculoskeletal disorders was improved in regions of the neck and shoulders. Root mean square (RMS) of the EMG signal decreased from 0.347 ± 0.150 to 0.286 ± 0.130 (p = 0.010) with usage of ARG; a decrease was observed in all surgeons. The greatest RMS decrease was observed in trapezius and sternocleidomastoid muscles. The decrease in brachioradialis muscle was small.
conclusionARG assisted with correction of bad posture in surgeons during video-assisted surgery and reduced muscular fatigue of the upper body. This study highlights the superior ergonomic efficiency of ARG in video-assisted 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.