Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Gynecological Surgery 4/2016

Open Access 01-11-2016 | Original Article

Ergonomics of laparoscopic graspers and the importance of haptic feedback: the surgeons’ perspective

Authors: Chantal C. J. Alleblas, Michel P. H. Vleugels, Theodoor E. Nieboer

Published in: Gynecological Surgery | Issue 4/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Haptic feedback is drastically reduced in laparoscopic surgery compared to open surgery. Introducing enhanced haptic feedback in laparoscopic instruments might well improve surgical safety and efficiency. In the design process of a laparoscopic grasper with enhanced haptic feedback, handle design should be addressed to strive for optimal usability and comfort. Additionally, the surgeons’ perspective on the potential benefits of haptic feedback should be assessed to ascertain the clinical interest of enhanced haptic feedback. A questionnaire was designed to determine surgeons’ use and preferences for laparoscopic instruments and expectations about enhanced haptic feedback. Surgeons were also asked whether they experience physical complaints related to laparoscopic instruments. The questionnaire was distributed to a group of laparoscopic surgeons based in Europe. From the 279 contacted subjects, 98 completed the questionnaire (response rate 35 %). Of all respondents, 77 % reported physical complaints directly attributable to the use of laparoscopic instruments. No evident similarity in the main preference for graspers was found, either with or without haptic feedback. According to respondents, the added value of haptic feedback could be of particular use in feeling differences in tissue consistencies, feeling the applied pressure, locating a tumor or enlarged lymph node, feeling arterial pulse, and limiting strain in the surgeon’s hand. This study stresses that the high prevalence of physical complaints directly related to laparoscopic instruments among laparoscopic surgeons is still relevant. Furthermore, the potential benefits of enhanced haptic feedback in laparoscopic surgery are recognized by laparoscopic specialists. Therefore, haptic feedback is considered an unmet need in laparoscopy.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Breedveld P, Stassen HG, Meijer DW, Jakimowicz JJ (1999) Manipulation in laparoscopic surgery: overview of impeding effects and supporting aids. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 9:469–480CrossRefPubMed Breedveld P, Stassen HG, Meijer DW, Jakimowicz JJ (1999) Manipulation in laparoscopic surgery: overview of impeding effects and supporting aids. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 9:469–480CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Westebring-van der Putten EP, Goossens RHM, Jakimowicz JJ, Dankelman J (2008) Haptics in minimally invasive surgery—a review. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 17:3–16CrossRefPubMed Westebring-van der Putten EP, Goossens RHM, Jakimowicz JJ, Dankelman J (2008) Haptics in minimally invasive surgery—a review. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 17:3–16CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Ottermo MV, Ovstedal M, Lango T, Stavdahl O, Yavuz Y, Johansen TA, Marvik R (2006) The role of tactile feedback in laparoscopic surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 16:390–400CrossRefPubMed Ottermo MV, Ovstedal M, Lango T, Stavdahl O, Yavuz Y, Johansen TA, Marvik R (2006) The role of tactile feedback in laparoscopic surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 16:390–400CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference den Boer KT, Herder JL, Sjoerdsma W, Meijer DW, Gouma DJ, Stassen HG (1999) Sensitivity of laparoscopic dissectors—what can you feel? Surg Endosc 13:869–873CrossRef den Boer KT, Herder JL, Sjoerdsma W, Meijer DW, Gouma DJ, Stassen HG (1999) Sensitivity of laparoscopic dissectors—what can you feel? Surg Endosc 13:869–873CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Bholat OS, Haluck RS, Kutz RH, Gorman PJ, Krummel TM (1999) Defining the role of haptic feedback in minimally invasive surgery. Stud Health Technol Inform 62:62–66PubMed Bholat OS, Haluck RS, Kutz RH, Gorman PJ, Krummel TM (1999) Defining the role of haptic feedback in minimally invasive surgery. Stud Health Technol Inform 62:62–66PubMed
6.
go back to reference Way LW, Stewart L, Gantert W, Liu K, Lee CM, Whang K, Hunter JG (2003) Causes and prevention of laparoscopic bile duct injuries—analysis of 252 cases from a human factors and cognitive psychology perspective. Ann Surg 237:460–469PubMedPubMedCentral Way LW, Stewart L, Gantert W, Liu K, Lee CM, Whang K, Hunter JG (2003) Causes and prevention of laparoscopic bile duct injuries—analysis of 252 cases from a human factors and cognitive psychology perspective. Ann Surg 237:460–469PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Dekker SW, Hugh TB (2008) Laparoscopic bile duct injury: understanding the psychology and heuristics of the error. ANZ J Surg 78:1109–1114CrossRefPubMed Dekker SW, Hugh TB (2008) Laparoscopic bile duct injury: understanding the psychology and heuristics of the error. ANZ J Surg 78:1109–1114CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference McKinley SK, Brunt LM, Schwaitzberg SD (2014) Prevention of bile duct injury: the case for incorporating educational theories of expertise. Surg Endosc 28:3385–3391CrossRefPubMed McKinley SK, Brunt LM, Schwaitzberg SD (2014) Prevention of bile duct injury: the case for incorporating educational theories of expertise. Surg Endosc 28:3385–3391CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Rodrigues SP, Ter Kuile M, Dankelman J, Jansen FW (2012) Patient safety risk factors in minimally invasive surgery: a validation study. Gynecol Surg 9:265–27CrossRefPubMed Rodrigues SP, Ter Kuile M, Dankelman J, Jansen FW (2012) Patient safety risk factors in minimally invasive surgery: a validation study. Gynecol Surg 9:265–27CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Tholey G, Desai JP, Castellanos AE (2005) Force feedback plays a significant role in minimally invasive surgery: results and analysis. Ann Surg 241:102–109PubMedPubMedCentral Tholey G, Desai JP, Castellanos AE (2005) Force feedback plays a significant role in minimally invasive surgery: results and analysis. Ann Surg 241:102–109PubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Heijnsdijk EA, Dankelman J, Gouma DJ (2002) Effectiveness of grasping and duration of clamping using laparoscopic graspers. Surg Endosc 16:1329–1331CrossRefPubMed Heijnsdijk EA, Dankelman J, Gouma DJ (2002) Effectiveness of grasping and duration of clamping using laparoscopic graspers. Surg Endosc 16:1329–1331CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Marucci DD, Shakeshaft AJ, Cartmill JA, Cox MR, Adams SG, Martin CJ (2000) Grasper trauma during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Aust NZ J Surg 70:578–581CrossRef Marucci DD, Shakeshaft AJ, Cartmill JA, Cox MR, Adams SG, Martin CJ (2000) Grasper trauma during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Aust NZ J Surg 70:578–581CrossRef
13.
go back to reference van der Meijden OA, Schijven MP (2009) The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review. Surg Endosc 23:1180–1190CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral van der Meijden OA, Schijven MP (2009) The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review. Surg Endosc 23:1180–1190CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Schostek S, Schurr MO, Buess GF (2009) Review on aspects of artificial tactile feedback in laparoscopic surgery. Med Eng Phys 31:887–898CrossRefPubMed Schostek S, Schurr MO, Buess GF (2009) Review on aspects of artificial tactile feedback in laparoscopic surgery. Med Eng Phys 31:887–898CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Lucas-Hernandez M, Pagador JB, Perez-Duarte FJ, Castello P, Sanchez-Margallo FM (2014) Ergonomics problems due to the use and design of dissector and needle holder: a survey in minimally invasive surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 24:E170–E177CrossRefPubMed Lucas-Hernandez M, Pagador JB, Perez-Duarte FJ, Castello P, Sanchez-Margallo FM (2014) Ergonomics problems due to the use and design of dissector and needle holder: a survey in minimally invasive surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 24:E170–E177CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Sari V, Nieboer TE, Vierhout ME, Stegeman DF, Kluivers KB (2010) The operation room as a hostile environment for surgeons: physical complaints during and after laparoscopy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 19:105–109CrossRefPubMed Sari V, Nieboer TE, Vierhout ME, Stegeman DF, Kluivers KB (2010) The operation room as a hostile environment for surgeons: physical complaints during and after laparoscopy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 19:105–109CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Van Veelen MA, Meijer DW (1999) Ergonomics and design of laparoscopic instruments: results of a survey among laparoscopic surgeons. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 9:481–489CrossRefPubMed Van Veelen MA, Meijer DW (1999) Ergonomics and design of laparoscopic instruments: results of a survey among laparoscopic surgeons. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 9:481–489CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Berguer R (1998) Surgical technology and the ergonomics of laparoscopic instruments. Surg Endosc 12:458–462CrossRefPubMed Berguer R (1998) Surgical technology and the ergonomics of laparoscopic instruments. Surg Endosc 12:458–462CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Sutton E, Irvin M, Zeigler C, Lee G, Park A (2014) The ergonomics of women in surgery. Surg Endosc 28:1051–1055CrossRefPubMed Sutton E, Irvin M, Zeigler C, Lee G, Park A (2014) The ergonomics of women in surgery. Surg Endosc 28:1051–1055CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Adams DM, Fenton SJ, Schirmer BD, Mahvi DM, Horvath K, Nichol P (2008) One size does not fit all: current disposable laparoscopic devices do not fit the needs of female laparoscopic surgeons. Surg Endosc 22:2310–2313CrossRefPubMed Adams DM, Fenton SJ, Schirmer BD, Mahvi DM, Horvath K, Nichol P (2008) One size does not fit all: current disposable laparoscopic devices do not fit the needs of female laparoscopic surgeons. Surg Endosc 22:2310–2313CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Berguer R, Hreljac A (2004) The relationship between hand size and difficulty using surgical instruments: a survey of 726 laparoscopic surgeons. Surg Endosc 18:508–512CrossRefPubMed Berguer R, Hreljac A (2004) The relationship between hand size and difficulty using surgical instruments: a survey of 726 laparoscopic surgeons. Surg Endosc 18:508–512CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Goossens RHM, van Veelen MA (2001) Assessment of ergonomics in laparoscopic surgery. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 10:175–179CrossRef Goossens RHM, van Veelen MA (2001) Assessment of ergonomics in laparoscopic surgery. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 10:175–179CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Vleugels M, Nieboer B (2015) Real time haptic feedback in endoscopy; the proof of concept. Gynecol Surg 12(Suppl 1):97 Vleugels M, Nieboer B (2015) Real time haptic feedback in endoscopy; the proof of concept. Gynecol Surg 12(Suppl 1):97
24.
go back to reference Santos-Carreras L, Hagen M, Gassert R, Bleuler H (2012) Survey on surgical instrument handle design: ergonomics and acceptance. Surg Innov 19:50–59CrossRefPubMed Santos-Carreras L, Hagen M, Gassert R, Bleuler H (2012) Survey on surgical instrument handle design: ergonomics and acceptance. Surg Innov 19:50–59CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Jinadu O (2005) A multi-centre survey on the team concept of instrument design in gyn-endoscopy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 14:345–351CrossRefPubMed Jinadu O (2005) A multi-centre survey on the team concept of instrument design in gyn-endoscopy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 14:345–351CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Kuijt-Evers LFM (2007) Comfort in using hand tools: theory, design and evaluation. Dissertation, Delft University of Technology Kuijt-Evers LFM (2007) Comfort in using hand tools: theory, design and evaluation. Dissertation, Delft University of Technology
27.
go back to reference Rodrick D, Karwowski W, Marras WS (2012) Work-related upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders. In: Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. Wiley, New Jersey Rodrick D, Karwowski W, Marras WS (2012) Work-related upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders. In: Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. Wiley, New Jersey
28.
go back to reference Buchel D, Marvik R, Hallabrin B, Matern U (2010) Ergonomics of disposable handles for minimally invasive surgery. Surg Endosc 24:992–1004CrossRefPubMed Buchel D, Marvik R, Hallabrin B, Matern U (2010) Ergonomics of disposable handles for minimally invasive surgery. Surg Endosc 24:992–1004CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Tung KD, Shorti RM, Downey EC, Bloswick DS, Merryweather AS (2015) The effect of ergonomic laparoscopic tool handle design on performance and efficiency. Surg Endosc 29:2500–2505CrossRefPubMed Tung KD, Shorti RM, Downey EC, Bloswick DS, Merryweather AS (2015) The effect of ergonomic laparoscopic tool handle design on performance and efficiency. Surg Endosc 29:2500–2505CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Matern U, Kuttler G, Giebmeyer C, Waller P, Faist M (2004) Ergonomic aspects of five different types of laparoscopic instrument handles under dynamic conditions with respect to specific laparoscopic tasks: an electromyographic-based study. Surg Endosc 18:1231–1241CrossRefPubMed Matern U, Kuttler G, Giebmeyer C, Waller P, Faist M (2004) Ergonomic aspects of five different types of laparoscopic instrument handles under dynamic conditions with respect to specific laparoscopic tasks: an electromyographic-based study. Surg Endosc 18:1231–1241CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Ergonomics of laparoscopic graspers and the importance of haptic feedback: the surgeons’ perspective
Authors
Chantal C. J. Alleblas
Michel P. H. Vleugels
Theodoor E. Nieboer
Publication date
01-11-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Gynecological Surgery / Issue 4/2016
Print ISSN: 1613-2076
Electronic ISSN: 1613-2084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10397-016-0959-z

Other articles of this Issue 4/2016

Gynecological Surgery 4/2016 Go to the issue