ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2026
Ergonomic evaluation of the Senhance® robotic system in minimally invasive gynecologic procedures versus conventional laparoscopy: an exploratory study focusing on surgeon's muscle activity.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 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.
- Intelligent therapeutic robotic-assisted surgery as the next frontier of precision oncology.Frontiers in oncology · 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
purposePrimary: To evaluate whether robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery using the Senhance® Surgical System has the potential to reduce muscular demands compared to conventional laparoscopy. Secondary: To verify that the novel eye-tracking feature for zoom and the selection of functions in the Senhance® System menu is not associated with increased eyestrain or neck strain.
methodsIn a within-subject design, 2 experienced surgeons performed 11 robot-assisted and 12 conventional laparoscopic procedures. Muscular demands were monitored throughout surgical procedures by assessing the muscle activity via bipolar surface electromyography of seven muscles of the lower back, shoulder-neck, and forearms. Surgeons' head, arm, and torso posture was assessed by gravimetrical position sensors. Furthermore, musculoskeletal discomfort, mental and physical workload, task difficulty and working precision were rated by the surgeons. In addition, a ten-item eyestrain questionnaire was administered after each surgical procedure.
resultsFour out of seven muscles were relieved when working with Senhance®. Only in the left shoulder-neck area there was a statistically significant increase in muscle activation associated with robotic-assisted surgery. Changes in surgeons' posture related to the surgical technique corresponded to the changes in muscle activation. Furthermore, surgeons reported no musculoskeletal discomfort under both conditions and similar levels of workload (mental and physical), and task difficulty. Working precision was subjectively rated to be better during standard laparoscopy. No eyestrain occurred during any of the procedures.
conclusionThis exploratory study identified the potential of the Senhance® Surgical System for ergonomic improvements and indicated no impairments by the novel eye-tracking feature on muscle demands and eyestrain. Follow-up studies with larger and more diverse indications are needed that also consider clinical outcomes, which were not part of the present study.
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.