ArticleAmerican journal of surgery2022
Gender-differences of proceduralists in perception of hand-held surgical instrument fit - A cross-sectional survey.
Article in American journal of surgery, 2022. 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Musculoskeletal disorders and discomfort for female surgeons or surgeons with small hand size when using hand-held surgical instruments: a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Does surgeon sex and anthropometry matter for tool usability in traditional laparoscopic surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Global perspectives on surgical instrument fit: unveiling challenges faced by urologists.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Ergonomics of Surgical Instruments Across Surgical Specialties: Responses From 459 Surgeons.Surgical innovation · 2026Article
- Female Surgical Ergonomics in Otolaryngology.Operative techniques in otolaryngology--head and neck surgery · 2025Article
- Female Surgical Ergonomics in Otolaryngology: A National Survey Study.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2024Article
- Perceived comfort and tool usability during robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopic surgery: a survey study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Female Surgical Ergonomics in Otolaryngology: A Qualitative Study.The Laryngoscope · 2023Article
- Surgical Instrument Designers and Inventors-Where are the Women?The American surgeon · 2023Review
- Surgical device design: do instruments fit today's surgeons?BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies · 2023Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveDetermining perception of hand size as it relates to instrument use and ability to perform a procedure in a diverse population of proceduralists across surgical and medical specialties.
methodsCross-sectional survey was distributed via electronic format to a convenience sample of surgeons/physicians. Secondary analysis included identified instrument use and choice of/perception of ability to learn and perform procedures.
results488 respondents, 84.4% (female), 75.8% (glove size ≤6.5), and 82.2% (surgical specialties). 67.8% reported trouble using surgical instruments, primarily endoscopes, laparoscopic instruments, and needle drivers. Latent class analysis identified two groups of female respondents with similar hand sizes but differ in the perception of their hand's abilities. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Instruments beyond laparoscopic instruments do not fit all hands. Even among female with physicians with similar hand size, there is a sub-set who struggle using surgical tools. Beyond gender and hand size, the operator's perception of their hand and their ability is critical in determining the viability of instrument mastery.
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.