ArticleThe Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology2026
Robotic Surgery in Australasian Gynaecology: Results of a 2025 Cross-Sectional Survey.
Article in The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic-assisted gynaecologic surgery has expanded globally, yet its adoption in Australasia remains variable.
aimTo evaluate the current attitudes, practice patterns, and perceived barriers surrounding robotic-assisted gynaecologic surgery among clinicians in Australia and New Zealand (Australasian). MATERIAL AND
methodsA cross-sectional, anonymised electronic survey was distributed to all RANZCOG-certified obstetrician-gynaecologists practicing in Australasian. The survey assessed demographics, access to and use of robotic platforms, perceived advantages and limitations, and willingness to expand robotic practice. Associations between years of clinical experience and access, utilisation, and attitudes toward robotic surgery were analysed.
resultsA total of 276 clinicians responded. Most (62.2%) had more than 10 years of clinical experience. 37.5% reported access to robotic-assisted surgery, and among those, 34% currently performed robotic procedures mostly for < 25% of major operations. Willingness to expand usage remained low even if access improved (42.8%). Ergonomic benefit and surgeon longevity were the most cited advantages, while fewer than half believed robotics improved patient outcomes. Main barriers were high cost, longer operative time, limited evidence of benefit, and scarce training opportunities. Clinicians with ≤ 10 years of experience were more likely than senior colleagues to perceive advantages (68.3% vs. 38.8%) and to express willingness to adopt robotics if given access (56.9% vs. 33.7%).
conclusionsAs of 2025, robotic surgery remains limited in Australasian gynaecology, with adoption shaped by practical concerns, limited evidence, cost, and access. Nevertheless, greater enthusiasm among early-career clinicians suggests future practice may evolve. Ongoing evaluation and evidence-based decision-making will be essential as the field advances.
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.