The Evolution and Ergonomics of Robotic-Assisted Surgical Systems

A research review on clinical needs, technical requirements, and normativity in the design of surgical robots

“…From Table it is possible to extract the most urgent clinical needs that should be met in order to achieve greater acceptance and market penetration of surgical robots. These clinical needs are: Cost reduction . To gain acceptance, new robotic systems must demonstrate relative competitiveness versus a conventional alternative and achieve a favourable ratio of cost–benefit.…”

“…Technologies to be developed should aim not only to support current surgical procedures better, but also to open up new clinical opportunities. Research on surgical robots should still provide response to various technical requirements, which we highlight below: Reduced size, shape and weight . Reduced access provided by new minimally access techniques imposes hard design constraints on the size, shape and weight of instruments and robotic modules conceived for these procedures.…”

The Minimally Invasive Manipulator: An ergonomic and economic non-robotic alternative for endoscopy?

“…For the surgical team, however, it results in a more complicated working environment (1). Research has proven COV to be more physically exhausting than open surgery (2)(3)(4)(5). The underlying reasons include motion reversion and scaling due to the fulcrum effect of the incision, awkward, static postures and a reduced number of degrees of freedom (DOFs) of manipulation as compared to open surgery.…”

“…It has been shown to be ergonomically advantageous over conventional laparoscopy, enabling a more natural posture (7,8). The surgeon is seated at a console remote from the patient, providing a more ergonomic posture than operating in a patient-side position (5). Moreover, the da Vinci offers the operator a support for the arms, as opposed to COV, which forces the surgeon to operate with the arms hovering in the air.…”