Ergonomic comparison of laparoscopic hand instruments in a single site surgery simulator with novices

Riggle, Jakeb D.; Miller, Emily E.; McCrory, Bernadette; Meitl, Alex; Lim, Eric T. K.; Hallbeck, M. Susan; LaGrange, Chad A.

doi:10.3109/13645706.2014.946426

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One subject stated "it was hard to hold and adjust with the same hand." While this study focused on laparoscopic tools and hand size, it is consistent with other studies reporting ergonomic inconveniences for surgeons performing laparoscopic surgery [20,21].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Assessment of Obstetrician-Gynecologists Performing Laparoscopic Surgery: Study of Hand Size and Surgical Instruments

Huang¹,

McGlothlin²

2017

J Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Assessment of Obstetrician-Gynecologists Performing Laparoscopic Surgery: Study of Hand Size and Surgical Instruments

Huang¹,

McGlothlin²

2017

J Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The literature search identified 12 studies [12, 15, 37–46] investigating the ergonomics of a single-port laparoscopic procedure. Due to a lack of larger randomized controlled trials on this topic, surveys of expert opinion and systematic reviews have also been considered.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The above-mentioned studies have many methodological shortcomings. In 13 studies, the evaluation was done with a box trainer task assessment [6–18]; moreover, in five studies the tasks were performed by medical students [8, 9, 12, 15, 16]. In one randomized trial, in which straight instruments were compared with articulating instruments in 150 laparoscopic cholecystectomies, the external validity was limited due to untypical dissection of Calot’s triangle [14].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundLaparoscopic surgery changed the management of numerous surgical conditions. It was associated with many advantages over open surgery, such as decreased postoperative pain, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay and excellent cosmesis. Since two decades single-incision endoscopic surgery (SIES) was introduced to the surgical community. SIES could possibly result in even better postoperative outcomes than multi-port laparoscopic surgery, especially concerning cosmetic outcomes and pain. However, the single-incision surgical procedure is associated with quite some challenges.MethodsAn expert panel of surgeons has been selected and invited to participate in the preparation of the material for a consensus meeting on the topic SIES, which was held during the EAES congress in Frankfurt, June 16, 2017. The material presented during the consensus meeting was based on evidence identified through a systematic search of literature according to a pre-specified protocol. Three main topics with respect to SIES have been identified by the panel: (1) General, (2) Organ specific, (3) New development. Within each of these topics, subcategories have been defined. Evidence was graded according to the Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence. Recommendations were made according to the GRADE criteria.ResultsIn general, there is a lack of high level evidence and a lack of long-term follow-up in the field of single-incision endoscopic surgery. In selected patients, the single-incision approach seems to be safe and effective in terms of perioperative morbidity. Satisfaction with cosmesis has been established to be the main advantage of the single-incision approach. Less pain after single-incision approach compared to conventional laparoscopy seems to be considered an advantage, although it has not been consistently demonstrated across studies.ConclusionsConsidering the increased direct costs (devices, instruments and operating time) of the SIES procedure and the prolonged learning curve, wider acceptance of the procedure should be supported only after demonstration of clear benefits.

show abstract

“…Therefore, in order to technically increase the manipulation angle, pre bent and articulating instruments have been introduced. Despite the fact that, simulation studies displayed a difficulty of novice surgeons in using articulating instruments[52], the combination of an dynamically bending and a pre bent tool minimizes the task completion time[53]. In the setting of SI fundoplication, both the standard[14,21,22,27,28,30] and the articulating setup[11,12,18,27,32] has been applied.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single incision laparoscopic fundoplication: A systematic review of the literature

Perivoliotis

Sarakatsianou

Tepetes

et al. 2019

WJGS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Fundoplication, was first introduced as a surgical treatment method of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Consequently, several modifications of this method have been described, whereas laparoscopic fundoplication was recently introduced. Although single incision (SI) fundoplication was considered as an alternative to the conventional laparoscopic approach, several studies reported an increased operation duration, and high rates of multiport conversion and incisional hernia. AIM To provide a current overview of the technical variations and the postoperative outcomes of patients submitted to SI fundoplication. METHODS The present systematic review of the literature was designed and conducted on the basis of the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic screening of the electronic scholar databases (Medline, Scopus and Web of Science) was performed. RESULTS Literature search resulted in the identification of 19 studies. Overall, 266, 137 and 110 SI Nissen, Dor and Toupet fundoplications were reported, respectively. In the majority of the trials, standard laparoscopic instruments were used. The left liver lobe was displayed through the use of forceps, graspers, retractors, drains or even glue. Both intra-corporeal and extracorporeal suturing was described. Mean operative time was 136.3 min. Overall complication rate was 5.2% and the rate of incisional hernia was 0.9%. No mortality was reported. CONCLUSION Due to the methodological heterogeneity and the lack of high quality studies comparing multi to single access techniques and the several variations, we conclude that further well designed studies are necessary, in order to evaluate the role of SI fundoplication.

show abstract

Ergonomic comparison of laparoscopic hand instruments in a single site surgery simulator with novices

Cited by 15 publications

References 22 publications

Assessment of Obstetrician-Gynecologists Performing Laparoscopic Surgery: Study of Hand Size and Surgical Instruments

Assessment of Obstetrician-Gynecologists Performing Laparoscopic Surgery: Study of Hand Size and Surgical Instruments

European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery

Single incision laparoscopic fundoplication: A systematic review of the literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About