Observational studySurgical endoscopy2026
Workload and usability evaluation of the da Vinci SP and Xi during low anterior resections.
Observational study in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. 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.
- A prospective randomized comparative trial of da Vinci SP versus da Vinci Xi in colon and rectosigmoid cancer surgery: a single-center, open-label study protocol.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Article
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
backgroundRobotic surgeries have become increasingly popular in the last 20 years, spurring technological innovations.
objectiveIn this observational study, we compared the workload of Intuitive's da Vinci Single Port (SP) with the da Vinci Xi.
methodsWe evaluated two surgeons during 24 total low anterior resection surgeries at a large academic hospital, with 12 surgeries utilizing the SP and 12 with the Xi. Surveys were administered to both surgeons and their teams before and after each surgery. Surgeons self-evaluated their workloads (mental demand, physical demand, temporal demand, success/performance, effort, frustration, difficulty, fatigue) and the usability of each platform (efficiency and precision of the surgical instruments and camera, touchpad usage, confidence) via survey.
resultsAnalysis revealed statistically significant differences in mental and physical workloads (p-value ≤ 0.05) during the vascular dissection subsection, with higher demands in the SP than the Xi and the circulating nurse noting greater effort levels in the SP than the Xi. The robot platform significantly affected robot usability, with surgeons stating that the Xi was more precise and efficient in surgical instrument and camera usage than the SP, leading to higher confidence scores in the Xi. LIMITATIONS: Only two surgeons were surveyed, and the da Vinci SP was novel and likely associated with a learning curve.
conclusionsUsability differences may explain differences in workloads and confidence. Understanding these differences between the robots can aid in selecting optimal cases for each platform.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41275003What 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.