1.Robotic and Navigation Systems in Orthopaedic Surgery: How Much Do Our Patients Understand?.
Shivan S JASSIM ; Harry BENJAMIN-LAING ; Stephen L DOUGLAS ; Fares S HADDAD
Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery 2014;6(4):462-467
BACKGROUND: Technology in orthopaedic surgery has become more widespread in the past 20 years, with emerging evidence of its benefits in arthroplasty. Although patients are aware of benefits of conventional joint replacement, little is known on patients' knowledge of the prevalence, benefits or drawbacks of surgery involving navigation or robotic systems. METHODS: In an outpatient arthroplasty clinic, 100 consecutive patients were approached and given questionnaires to assess their knowledge of navigation and robotics in orthopaedic surgery. Participation in the survey was voluntary. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients volunteered to participate in the survey, mean age 56.2 years (range, 19 to 88 years; 52 female, 46 male). Forty percent of patients thought more than 30% of National Health Service (NHS) orthopaedic operations involved navigation or robotics; 80% believed this was the same level or less than the private sector. One-third believed most of an operation could be performed independently by a robotic/navigation system. Amongst perceived benefits of navigation/robotic surgery was more accurate surgery (47%), quicker surgery (50%), and making the surgeon's job easier (52%). Sixty-nine percent believed navigation/robotics was more expensive and 20% believed it held no benefit against conventional surgery, with only 9% believing it led to longer surgery. Almost 50% would not mind at least some of their operation being performed with use of robotics/navigation. CONCLUSIONS: Although few patients were familiar with this new technology, there appeared to be a strong consensus it was quicker and more accurate than conventional surgery. Many patients appear to believe navigation and robotics in orthopaedic surgery is largely the preserve of the private sector. This study demonstrates public knowledge of such new technologies is limited and a need to inform patients of the relative merits and drawbacks of such surgery prior to their more widespread implementation.
Adult
;
Aged
;
Aged, 80 and over
;
*Comprehension
;
Cross-Sectional Studies
;
Female
;
Health Care Surveys
;
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
;
Humans
;
Male
;
Middle Aged
;
Orthopedic Procedures/*psychology
;
Questionnaires
;
Robotic Surgical Procedures/psychology
;
Surgery, Computer-Assisted/*psychology
;
Young Adult
2.Does a robotic surgery approach offer optimal ergonomics to gynecologic surgeons?: a comprehensive ergonomics survey study in gynecologic robotic surgery.
Mija Ruth LEE ; Gyusung Isaiah LEE
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology 2017;28(5):e70-
OBJECTIVE: To better understand the ergonomics associated with robotic surgery including physical discomfort and symptoms, factors influencing symptom reporting, and robotic surgery systems components recommended to be improved. METHODS: The anonymous survey included 20 questions regarding demographics, systems, ergonomics, and physical symptoms and was completed by experienced robotic surgeons online through American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and Society of Robotic Surgery (SRS). RESULTS: There were 289 (260 gynecology, 22 gynecology-oncology, and 7 urogynecology) gynecologic surgeon respondents regularly practicing robotic surgery. Statistical data analysis was performed using the t-test, χ² test, and logistic regression. One hundred fifty-six surgeons (54.0%) reported experiencing physical symptoms or discomfort. Participants with higher robotic case volume reported significantly lower physical symptom report rates (p<0.05). Gynecologists who felt highly confident about managing ergonomic settings not only acknowledged that the adjustments were helpful for better ergonomics but also reported a lower physical symptom rate (p<0.05). In minimizing their symptoms, surgeons changed ergonomic settings (32.7%), took a break (33.3%) or simply ignored the problem (34%). Fingers and neck were the most common body parts with symptoms. Eye symptom complaints were significantly decreased with the Si robot (p<0.05). The most common robotic system components to be improved for better ergonomics were microphone/speaker, pedal design, and finger clutch. CONCLUSION: More than half of participants reported physical symptoms which were found to be primarily associated with confidence in managing ergonomic settings and familiarity with the system depending on the volume of robotic cases. Optimal guidelines and education on managing ergonomic settings should be implemented to maximize the ergonomic benefits of robotic surgery.
Anonyms and Pseudonyms
;
Data Interpretation, Statistical
;
Demography
;
Education
;
Fingers
;
Gynecology
;
Human Body
;
Human Engineering*
;
Logistic Models
;
Neck
;
Recognition (Psychology)
;
Robotic Surgical Procedures
;
Surgeons*
;
Surveys and Questionnaires