ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2023
Assessment of robotic telesurgery system among surgeons: a single-center study.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comprehensive Comparison of Features of Robotic Surgery Systems in Abdominal Surgeries: A Narrative Review Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Toward safe clinical deployment of remote robotic surgery in Japan: five-year validation of the hinotori™ system using 5G wireless communication.International journal of clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Telesurgery: current status and strategies for latency reduction.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The field of robotic-assisted surgery is expanding rapidly; therefore, future robotic surgeons will need to be trained in an organized manner. Here, we aimed to examine surgeon performance on the Sinaflex Robotic Telesurgery System for correlation with training hours spent in training program. This is a prospective study of a single-center experience at the Hasan Sadikin Hospital, Bandung City of West Java, Indonesia. We included 43 surgeons from 11 departments, all invited to train using the Sinaflex Robotic Telesurgery system at the Hasan Sadikin Hospital. All study cohorts have never performed a robotic surgery procedure beforehand and have had at least five years of field experience. The surgeons were free to choose their training duration and simulation. After finishing the training session, they were asked to perform several tasks with increasing difficulty levels. There were nine training tasks in total with increasing levels of difficulty. A total of 43 surgeons from 11 different department were included in this prospective study. Our study was separated into 3 different batches and most surgeons failed to pass the examination (n = 12, 8, and 9, for batches 1, 2, and 3, respectively). The "failed" surgeon, additionally, tended to be older than the "passed" cohort (49.3 ± 7.4 vs 42.1 ± 7.3 years old, p = 0.005). In terms of duration of hours spent training on the robot, there was little difference training hours between the cohort that passed and the cohort that failed cohort (10.0 [8.4-10.1] vs 10.0 [8.0-10.0], respectively) with a p value of 0.265. We found no correlation between the total hours spent in the training program and surgeon performance on the Sinaflex robotic telesurgery system. Structured robot surgical training courses must be incorporated into the training programs.
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.