1518 SURGEON MORBIDITY DOES ROBOT-ASSISTED REALLY CAUSE LESS TRAUMA TO THE OPERATOR? AN INTERNATIONAL MULTIPLE SURGEONS' OPINION FROM EXPERIENCE OF OVER 3,000 CASES

摘要

You have accessJournal of UrologyTechnology & Instruments: Surgical Education & Skills Assessment/Ureteroscopy II1 Apr 20121518 SURGEON MORBIDITY DOES ROBOT-ASSISTED REALLY CAUSE LESS TRAUMA TO THE OPERATOR? AN INTERNATIONAL MULTIPLE SURGEONS' OPINION FROM EXPERIENCE OF OVER 3,000 CASES Dara Lundon, Brian Kelly, and David Bouchier-Hayes Dara LundonDara Lundon Dublin, Ireland More articles by this author , Brian KellyBrian Kelly Galway, Ireland More articles by this author , and David Bouchier-HayesDavid Bouchier-Hayes Galway, Ireland More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.1285AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Robot-assisted surgery has been lauded by many as it offers similar benefits to the patient as laparoscopic techniques, however by design, robotic assisted surgery has markedly different surgeon related ergonomics to open or laparoscopic surgery. There has been a dearth of information published on laparoscopic surgery as to the benefits it can offer to patients. However the inherent aesthetics of laparoscopic surgery lead to its less than satisfactory ergonomics. The significant effect of laparoscopic surgery on the operators health has highlighted the potential chronic morbidities and shortened operating careers of laparoscopic surgeons. As minimal other information is available to evaluate or compare the potential health benefits to the surgeon of robot-assisted surgery, it was our objective to assess the morbidity burden of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic surgeons, so as to ascertain if Robot-Assisted techniques could offer a happy medium- of benefits to the patient without harm to the surgeon. METHODS Following review of the literature for occupational morbidities suffered by surgeons and conducting a local pilot study, a link to an online questionnaire was distributed to a global network of Robotic Surgeons, as well as those practicing open and laparoscopic techniques. Demographic, risk factor and morbidity specifics were ascertained by this method, and comparison was made between groups in this study and with data from studies quantifying symptom burdens amongst laparoscopic surgeons. RESULTS Respondents were from 10 different countries, and their ages ranged from 25-54 years. Respondents had performed over 3000 procedures in the last year: Prostatectomies accounted for (79%) of robot-assisted procedures, versus 2% of laparoscopic procedures, otherwise the numbers of procedures between laparoscopic and robotic were comparable for partial nephrectomies, total nephrectomies, and cystectomies. 87 % of respondants reported more discomfort following laparoscopic surgery than robotic-assisted procedures. The predominant symptoms reported were numbness(31%), stiffness(31%) and pain (23%). CONCLUSIONS The occupational hazards of laparoscopic surgery have been highlighted as potentially shortening the careers of laparoscopic surgeons. Robot-assisted surgery offers the benefits of minimally invasive surgical technique to the patient with notably less operator morbidity than laparoscopic surgery. © 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 187Issue 4SApril 2012Page: e614-e615 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Dara Lundon Dublin, Ireland More articles by this author Brian Kelly Galway, Ireland More articles by this author David Bouchier-Hayes Galway, Ireland More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...