ArticleOtolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery2024
Female Surgical Ergonomics in Otolaryngology: A National Survey Study.
Article in Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Experiences of Women in Otolaryngology: A Scoping Review.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- Female Surgical Ergonomics in Otolaryngology.Operative techniques in otolaryngology--head and neck surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the nature and impact surgical ergonomic challenges experienced by female otolaryngologists. STUDY
designNational survey study.
settingFemale otolaryngology residents, fellows and attendings recruited via social media posting and email distribution.
methodsWe distributed a survey study to female otolaryngologists throughout the United States. The height and glove size of participants reporting difficulties with equipment and instruments were compared to those not reporting difficulties.
resultsNinety-six female otolaryngologists participated in our study, comprised of 43% residents, 10% fellows, and 47% attendings. Ninety percent of participants reported difficulties using equipment and 77% of participants reported difficulty with instruments, the most common being nasal endoscopic instruments (28%). The vast majority of participants reported pain during and (or) after the operation (92%). Head and neck (53%) and rhinology (44%) were identified as particularly challenging specialities, but only 25% of participants reported that ergonomics affected their career plans. Participants felt that adjustable equipment (60%), a variety of sizes of instruments (43%), and more discussion around ergonomics (47%) would help. Respondents reported adjusting the operating room to accommodate their size took extra time (44%) and was a mental burden (39%). Participants reporting difficulties with operating room equipment were significantly shorter than those without difficulties (64 inches vs 67 inches, P = .037), and those reporting difficulties with instruments had a smaller median glove size (6 vs 6.5, P = .018).
conclusionSurgical ergonomics represent a challenge for female otolaryngologists, particularly those with smaller hands and shorter height. Partnering with industry, we must address the needs of an increasingly diverse workforce to ensure that all surgeons can operate effectively and comfortably.
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.