Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2026
Evaluation of ergonomics using the DEXTER
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe implications of complex robotic surgery on the well-being of surgeons remains widely unexplored. The DEXTER Robotic Surgery System offers an open concept where the surgeon console can be used in a sterile manner, allowing flexibility to switch between the robotic system and conventional laparoscopy. The aim of this study was to evaluate surgical ergonomics during the use of the DEXTER Robotic System.
methodsA prospective, non-randomized international multicenter trial evaluating surgical ergonomics during the routine clinical practice was performed in Switzerland and USA. A photo camera captured the surgeon's posture at the console during surgery. Using picture editing programs, image analyses were created showing the surgeon's average posture and corresponding angles. Furthermore, sound levels were measured during cases. Data were compared to previous measurements (n = 33 surgeries) of a closed console robotic system using the same methodology.
resultsA total of 83,025 images from 40 surgical procedures were analyzed, performed by five surgeons. Knee, back, and elbow angles were within recommended ergonomic limits whereas neck and hip positions were classified as high-risk. Compared with a closed console robotic system, neck posture was significantly improved (p value 0.0001). Mean sound levels were 60.24 dB for all surgeries. Comparison to a robotic system with a closed console revealed a statistically quieter OR setting for the open DEXTER system (mean sound level 64.35 dB vs. 59.5 dB; p value 0.0001).
conclusionThe application of ergonomic measurements during a real-life setting for robotic surgery helped to reveal ergonomic advantages and challenges faced when using a new robotic technology. This is the first study providing ergonomic insights in the DEXTER surgical system, identifying individual possibilities for improvement. Future studies and recommendations will may lay the foundation for a personalized training and education in surgical ergonomics leading to a healthier workspace for all surgeons and their future careers.
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.