ArticleWorld journal of urology2026
Global perspectives on surgical instrument fit: unveiling challenges faced by urologists.
Article in World journal of urology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo address the limited exploration of surgical ergonomics and instrument fit in urology, we evaluated the relationship between surgeons' hand size, glove fit, gender, and their perceived ease of using various urologic instruments.
methodsAn anonymous web-based survey was designed and distributed to members of the Endourology Society, Society of Women in Urology, and urology residency programs in the United States. It included demographics, perceived hand size/strength, ease of instrument use, and discomfort.
resultsAmong 277 respondents (55% female, mean age 43.0 ± 11.4), 26% reported glove fit issues-more common in females (32% vs. 16%, p < 0.001). Nearly half (49%) reported hand size impacted their ability to use instruments and 52.73% reported having to make intraoperative adjustments in order to use the instruments effectively. Female urologists found all surgical instruments harder to use compared to their male counterparts (p < 0.05). Overall, 40% of respondents reported using some form of intervention to address discomfort and/or injury related to surgical instrument use (47% of females vs. 34% of males; p < 0.05). Female urologists and urologists with smaller hands reported significantly more discomfort using the flexible ureteroscope, disposable flexible ureteroscope, nephroscope, stapler, Ligasure, laparoscopic right angle, Trilogy™ and ShockPulse™ (p < 0.05).
conclusionsOur findings suggest that currently available urologic instruments do not fit a large subset of urologists. Industry collaboration is needed to address ergonomic disparities.
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.