ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2026
Noise levels in tele-operated robotic-assisted surgery-a phase-based analysis.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRobotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is becoming increasingly popular with one of its praised benefits being improved ergonomics. While other types of interventions like open or laparoscopic surgery have been assessed regarding the noise exposure and evaluations regarding the ergonomics are based on these findings, there are no studies analyzing the changed environment of tele-operated RAS.
methodsTwelve robotic interventions with an average length of 3.5 h, including (hemi-)colectomies, anterior rectum resections and sigmoidectomies were assessed using a sound level meter. Recordings were monitored by a medical expert, manually annotating individual phases of the intervention from the patient's entry till the exit of the operating room. Measured sound data were afterward mapped to one out of six corresponding surgical phases.
resultsThe data showed an average noise level of 60.5(±3.35) dB(A) and a L(A)eq of 63.49 dB(A) with the robotic phase being significantly, but only 0.15 dB(A) louder than the non-robotic surgical part (60.4(±3.14) dB(A)). Overall the peri-surgical phase was louder than the surgery itself with the post-surgical phase being the loudest of all phases with a level of 61.2 (±4.82) dB(A).
conclusionsRegarding sound levels tele-operated RAS seems comparable with open and laparoscopic surgery, despite the robotic phase being to a small extent louder within this evaluation. Nevertheless sound levels appear high and further reduction should be considered in order to improve ergonomics and patient safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41999566What 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.