Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-09-2015 | New Technology

Development of an arm support system to improve ergonomics in laparoscopic surgery: study design and provisional results

Authors: Benjamin Steinhilber, Sascha Hoffmann, Kristian Karlovic, Stefan Pfeffer, Thomas Maier, Omar Hallasheh, Stephan Kruck, Robert Seibt, Monika A. Rieger, Michael Heidingsfeld, Ronny Feuer, Oliver Sawodny, Ralf Rothmund, Karl-Dietrich Sievert

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 9/2015

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic surgery (LS) induces physical stress to the surgeon that is associated with an increased prevalence of musculoskeletal pain and injury in the shoulder–neck region. The aim of this research project is to develop an arm support system (ASsyst) that reduces physical stress and is applicable to various laparoscopic interventions and operation room settings.

Methods

A systematic approach to develop an ASsyst started in October 2012 consisting of five consecutive steps. In step 1, 14 laparoscopic interventions were observed using subjective and objective measures to determine key indicators for the conception of an ASsyst in LS. In step 2, an expert workshop was held to find and evaluate solutions to generate concepts for a support system based on the results of step 1 and general methods. During the third step, prototypes of ASsyst were tested in an experimental setting. Steps 4 and 5 are currently in process and include the final development of the ASsyst using the most promising concept for the evaluation during simulated LS.

Results

Increased levels of physical stress were found in LS. Asymmetric strains were common. Three prototypes of ASsyst emerged from step 1 and 2. These prototypes were a cable construction with a noose for the lower arm, a support from below the elbow and a pneumatic vest supporting the upper arm. The experimental testing of these prototypes demonstrated reduced physical stress when compared to the unsupported environment. The support from below the elbow seemed to be the most practical in terms of implementation in various operation room settings and acceptance by surgeons. Step 4 and 5 are still in process.

Conclusions

Ergonomic problems have been identified in LS that could be addressed by an ASsyst. The concept of supporting the elbow from below has been found to be the most promising approach.

Uhrich ML, Underwood RA, Standeven JW et al (2002) Assessment of fatigue, monitor placement, and surgical experience during simulated laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 16(4):635–639. doi:10.1007/s00464-001-8151-5 CrossRefPubMed

Lippert H, Koch A, Marusch F et al (2002) Offene vs. laparoskopische Appendektomie (Open vs. laparoscopic appendectomy). Chirurg 73(8):791–798CrossRefPubMed

Quick NE, Gillette JC, Shapiro R et al (2003) The effect of using laparoscopic instruments on muscle activation patterns during minimally invasive surgical training procedures. Surg Endosc 17(3):462–465. doi:10.1007/s00464-002-8530-6 CrossRefPubMed

Berguer R, Forkey DL, Smith WD (1999) Ergonomic problems associated with laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 13(5):466–468CrossRefPubMed

Gofrit ON, Mikahail AA, Zorn KC et al (2008) Surgeons’ perceptions and injuries during and after urologic laparoscopic surgery. Urology 71(3):404–407. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2007.07.077 CrossRefPubMed

Esposito C, El Ghoneimi A, Yamataka A et al (2013) Work-related upper limb musculoskeletal disorders in paediatric laparoscopic surgery. A multicenter survey. J Pediatr Surg 48(8):1750–1756. doi:10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2013.01.054 CrossRefPubMed

Berguer R (1998) Surgical technology and the ergonomics of laparoscopic instruments. Surg Endosc 12(5):458–462CrossRefPubMed

Bohrer T, Koller M, Schlitt HJ et al (2011) Workload and quality of life of surgeons. Results and implications of a large-scale survey by the German society of surgery. Langenbecks Arch Surg 396(5):669–676. doi:10.1007/s00423-011-0791-x CrossRefPubMed

Hubert N, Gilles M, Desbrosses K et al (2013) Ergonomic assessment of the surgeon’s physical workload during standard and robotic assisted laparoscopic procedures. Int J Med Robot 9(2):142–147. doi:10.1002/rcs.1489 CrossRefPubMed

10.

O’Sullivan OE, O’Reilly BA (2012) Robot-assisted surgery—impact on gynaecological and pelvic floor reconstructive surgery. Int Urogynecol J 23(9):1163–1173. doi:10.1007/s00192-012-1790-3 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Lee GI, Lee MR, Clanton T et al (2014) Comparative assessment of physical and cognitive ergonomics associated with robotic and traditional laparoscopic surgeries. Surg Endosc 28(2):456–465. doi:10.1007/s00464-013-3213-z CrossRefPubMed

12.

Pfeffer S, Hofmann A, Maier T et al (2013) Ergonomics of selected laparoscopic procedures—need for action? Biomed Tech. doi:10.1515/bmt-2013-4228

13.

Hart S, Staveland L (1988) Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): results of empirical and theoretical research in human mental workload. North Holland, Amsterdamm

14.

Kuorinka I, Jonsson B, Kilbom A et al (1987) Standardised Nordic questionnaires for the analysis of musculoskeletal symptoms. Appl Ergon 18(3):233–237CrossRefPubMed

15.

Beitz W, Pahl G, Grote K et al (2007) Engineering Design. A Systematic Approach. Springer-Verlag London, London

16.

Stomberg MW, Tronstad S, Hedberg K et al (2010) Work-related musculoskeletal disorders when performing laparoscopic surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 20(1):49–53. doi:10.1097/SLE.0b013e3181cded54 CrossRefPubMed

17.

Szeto GPY, Ho P, Ting ACW et al (2009) Work-related musculoskeletal symptoms in surgeons. J Occup Rehabil 19(2):175–184. doi:10.1007/s10926-009-9176-1 CrossRefPubMed

18.

van Det MJ, Meijerink WJHJ, Hoff C et al (2009) Optimal ergonomics for laparoscopic surgery in minimally invasive surgery suites: a review and guidelines. Surg Endosc 23(6):1279–1285. doi:10.1007/s00464-008-0148-x CrossRefPubMed

19.

Berguer R, Rab GT, Abu-Ghaida H et al (1997) A comparison of surgeons’ posture during laparoscopic and open surgical procedures. Surg Endosc 11(2):139–142CrossRefPubMed

20.

Pérez-Duarte FJ, Lucas-Hernández M, Matos-Azevedo A et al (2014) Objective analysis of surgeons’ ergonomy during laparoendoscopic single-site surgery through the use of surface electromyography and a motion capture data glove. Surg Endosc 28(4):1314–1320. doi:10.1007/s00464-013-3334-4 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Miller K, Benden M, Pickens A et al (2012) Ergonomics principles associated with laparoscopic surgeon injury/illness. Hum Factors 54(6):1087–1092CrossRefPubMed

22.

Yin G, Han WK, Faddegon S et al (2013) Laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) in vivo suturing using a magnetic anchoring and guidance system (MAGS) camera in a porcine model: impact on ergonomics and workload. Urology 81(1):80–84. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2012.09.018 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Tse MA, Masters RSW, McManus AM et al (2008) Trunk muscle training, posture fatigue, and performance in laparoscopic surgery. J Endourol 22(5):1053–1058CrossRefPubMed

24.

Jafri M, Brown S, Arnold G et al (2013) Energy consumption during simulated minimal access surgery with and without using an armrest. Surg Endosc 27(3):971–977. doi:10.1007/s00464-012-2544-5 CrossRefPubMed

25.

Nezhat C, Lavie O, Lemyre M et al (2009) Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery in gynecology: scientific dream or reality? Fertil Steril 91(6):2620–2622. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.03.070 CrossRefPubMed

26.

Kim WT, Ham WS, Jeong W et al (2009) Failure and malfunction of da Vinci surgical systems during various robotic surgeries. Experience from six departments at a single institute. Urology 74(6):1234–1237CrossRefPubMed

Title: Development of an arm support system to improve ergonomics in laparoscopic surgery: study design and provisional results
Authors: Benjamin Steinhilber
Sascha Hoffmann
Kristian Karlovic
Stefan Pfeffer
Thomas Maier
Omar Hallasheh
Stephan Kruck
Robert Seibt
Monika A. Rieger
Michael Heidingsfeld
Ronny Feuer
Oliver Sawodny
Ralf Rothmund
Karl-Dietrich Sievert
Publication date: 01-09-2015
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 9/2015
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3984-x

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Development of an arm support system to improve ergonomics in laparoscopic surgery: study design and provisional results

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 9/2015

Erratum to: Oncological and surgical results of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for HCC less than 5 cm: case-matched analysis

Impact of surgical margins on overall and recurrence-free survival in parenchymal-sparing laparoscopic liver resections of colorectal metastases

Surgical treatment of medically refractory gastroparesis in the morbidly obese

Gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection under steady pressure automatically controlled endoscopy (SPACE); a multicenter randomized preclinical trial

Laparoscopic ventral/incisional hernia repair: updated guidelines from the EAES and EHS endorsed Consensus Development Conference

Comprehensive enhanced recovery pathway significantly reduces postoperative length of stay and opioid usage in elective laparoscopic colectomy