ReviewCureus2024
Ergonomics in Laparoscopic Box Training and Virtual Reality (VR) Simulations: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- A study comparing virtual reality simulation, 3D printed organ models and a combination of both for laparoscopy surgery skills acquisition.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Trial
- Effectiveness of Simulation-Based Gynecologic Endoscopy Training: A Systematic Review Comparing Objective Technical Skill Performance.International journal of women's health · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laparoscopic surgery has now become the gold standard in managing most surgical cases. Despite its advantages, working hours and in-theatre training restrictions have prompted trainees to explore alternatives like virtual reality (VR) simulations and box training. Furthermore, given the increased frequency of minimally invasive surgery and the prevalence of musculoskeletal issues among surgeons, there's a growing effort to optimize ergonomics. There is currently a lack of focus on ergonomics in training, prompting our study to inspect VR and box training's ergonomic outcomes and their impact on task performance. This systematic review was conducted at Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University, from January 27, 2024, to April 22, 2024. Multiple databases were searched electronically from January 1980 to March 2024, including only articles that utilized electromyography (EMG) or the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) to measure ergonomics. Two reviewers independently conducted eligibility assessment, data extraction, and risk of bias evaluation, with discrepancies resolved through consensus discussions. Ultimately, 12 studies were selected. EMG results indicated a higher %MVC (maximum voluntary contraction) in box training in poor ergonomic settings and a negative correlation between skills and muscle activity. Both modalities showed a significant decrease in NASA-TLX scores after training on the simulators and when comparing novice and experienced surgeons. Furthermore, a reduction in physical demand and improved task performance was observed, with significant differences found between experts and novices in a VR appendicectomy scenario. This systematic review reveals reduced muscle activity and physical demand among trained individuals in laparoscopic surgery with both box trainers and VR simulators, emphasizing the importance of addressing ergonomic considerations. To advance our understanding of surgical ergonomics, the standardization of measurement methods and higher-quality evidence, particularly through randomized controlled trials, are recommended.
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.