Observational studyInterdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2025
Objective Assessment of Ergonomics and Performance of Thoracic Surgeons During Real-Life Anatomical Robotic Pulmonary Resections.
Observational study in Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Transitioning from video-assisted to robotic-assisted anatomical pulmonary resection: outcomes from 340 cases in an Australian centre.Frontiers in oncology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesMotion tracking tools have been used in the analysis of surgeons' technical expertise and posture in simulated endoscopic surgery. But its use in humans in real-life robotic surgery is limited. We analysed the effect of surgeons' ergonomics and posture on skill metrics for vascular dissection during anatomical pulmonary resection.
methodsIn this observational study of vascular dissection/division during segmentectomy or lobectomy, we analysed the inter-group differences of those with more than (group 1) and less than (group 2) 100 robotic resections. The rapid upper limb assessment (RULA) scale was used to estimate ergonomic risk. Operative performance and posture for RULA were measured using the Kinovea-0.9.5 system. Path length of moving instruments, instrument speed, time for task completion, and duration of instruments out of vision were calculated to objectively assess operator performance.
resultsGroup 1 (expert) comprised 2 males and 1 female, aged 42-61 years. Group 2 (novice) comprised 4 males, aged 31-52 years. Sixty-seven patients underwent robotic anatomical resection using the da Vinci Xi robotic platform, with 180 pulmonary vessels isolations/divisions (Group 1 = 95 vs Group 2 = 85). Group 1 had significantly better RULA ergonomic scores (4.3 vs 4.7, P < .001) which was associated with higher speed (2.8 ± 0.8 vs 2.1 ± 0.2 cm/s, P < .001), shorter task completion time (388 ± 278 vs 520 ± 322 s, P = .001), and shorter duration of instruments out of vision (P < .001). There was no difference in path length (P = .8) and no significant correlation between RULA score and different parameters that assessed surgical performance.
conclusionsVideo motion tracking software is an effective and unobtrusive method to evaluate surgical ergonomics and performance in robotic surgery. Better ergonomics were associated with increased surgical experience and improved surgical performance.
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.