Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2022
Neuroenhancement of surgeons during robotic suturing.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Review of Cognitive Support Systems in the Operating Room.Surgical innovation · 2024Pooled it
- The ethical, legal and social issues of neuroergonomics in the workplace.Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 2026Article
- Use of Robotic Surgery in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: A Narrative Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Technical Skills Assessment in Robotic Surgery: A Review of Recent Methods.Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal · 2025Review
- Adapting Ourselves, Instead of the Environment: An Inquiry into Human Enhancement for Function and Beyond.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2024Article
- Anodal cerebellar t-DCS impacts skill learning and transfer on a robotic surgery training task.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Review
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe initial phases of robotic surgical skills acquisition are associated with poor technical performance, such as low knot-tensile strength (KTS). Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) can improve force and accuracy in motor tasks but research in surgery is limited to open and laparoscopic tasks in students. More recently, robotic surgery has gained traction and is now the most common approach for certain procedures (e.g. prostatectomy). Early-phase robotic suturing performance is dependent on prefrontal cortex (PFC) activation, and this study aimed to determine whether performance can be improved with prefrontal tDCS.
methodsFifteen surgical residents were randomized to either active then sham tDCS or sham then active tDCS, in two counterbalanced sessions in a double-blind crossover study. Within each session, participants performed a robotic suturing task repeated in three blocks: pre-, intra- and post-tDCS. During the intra-tDCS block, participants were randomized to either active tDCS (2 mA for 15 min) to the PFC or sham tDCS. Primary outcome measures of technical quality included KTS and error scores.
resultsSignificantly faster completion times were observed longitudinally, regardless of active (p < 0.001) or sham stimulation (p < 0.001). KTS was greater following active compared to sham stimulation (median: active = 44.35 N vs. sham = 27.12 N, p < 0.001). A significant reduction in error scores from "pre-" to "post-" (p = 0.029) were only observed in the active group.
conclusiontDCS could reduce error and enhance KTS during robotic suturing and warrants further exploration as an adjunct to robotic surgical training.
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.