ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2025
Optimising ergonomics in minimally invasive gynaecological surgery: a comprehensive review and practice recommendations.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2025. 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.
- Laparoscopic cholecystectomy using a wireless intelligent endoscopic system versus a conventional wired system: a retrospective study.BMC surgery · 2026Trial
- Robotic-Assisted vs Conventional Laparoscopy for Endometrial Cancer Staging: A Comparative Two-Center Study.Cancer management and research · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Modern minimally invasive gynaecological surgery greatly contributes to women's health; however, it can be physically demanding for surgeons. A plethora of available data shows that the optimisation of ergonomics in the operating room (OR) is crucial for the health and efficiency of surgeons. Objectives: To provide an overview of the importance of ergonomics and clinically useful, concise recommendations. Methods: A literature review with critical analysis of available data. Main Outcome Measures: Impact of ergonomics on the prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), fatigue levels, efficiency and subjective comfort among surgeons. Results: Evidence suggests that MSDs are highly prevalent among minimally invasive gynaecological surgeons and that several ergonomic interventions can greatly reduce muscle strain and improve clinical practice, with the most important being the planning of brief intraoperative breaks, the selection of proper laparoscopic instruments and the positioning of the operating table and monitor at the correct height. The adoption of robotic surgery can also improve surgical ergonomics. Clinical practice recommendations for ergonomic improvement in gynaecological laparoscopy based on the existing evidence are provided. Conclusions: Surgeons must be aware of the optimal ergonomic settings in the OR and impose measures to reduce risks and achieve a comfortable environment. What is New?: A comprehensive, praxis-oriented review with exact ergonomic advice for minimally invasive gynaecological surgeons.
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.