Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Who is hurting? A prospective study of surgeon ergonomics

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

There is a paucity of prospective data related to surgeon ergonomics, which affects career longevity. Robotic surgical systems may mitigate pain and workload. We hypothesized that ergonomic outcomes would vary based on surgeon height and gender, and the relative benefit of robotic surgery would vary based on these demographics.

Methods

Surgeons received questionnaires to fill out immediately before and after surgery to enable calculation of pain scores and task load. Surgeons who were ≤ 66 inches tall were considered “short”. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed where appropriate using Stata-MP version 14.2 (StataCorp LLC, College Station, TX).

Results

There were 124 questionnaires given to 20 surgeons; 97 (78%) were returned, and 12 (12%) laparoscopic operations were excluded, leaving 85 (69%) questionnaires for further analysis: 33 (38%) from short surgeons, and 24 (28%) from women, for 30 (35%) robotic and 55 (65%) open operations. There were 44/85 (52%) surgeons who reported worse pain after surgery. Overall pain scores (1.1 ± 2.6 vs 1.5 ± 2.6, p = 0.70) were similar for robotic and open operations. In multivariable analysis, greater surgeon pain scores were significantly associated with short surgeons (p < 0.001), male surgeons (p < 0.001), and long operative times (p = 0.03). Physical demand was lower for robot vs open operations (median 10 vs 13, p = 0.03). When short surgeons (p = 0.04) and male surgeons (p = 0.03) were examined as sub-groups, lower physical demand during robotic operations persisted, but was lost when only examining tall surgeons (p = 0.07) and female surgeons (p = 0.13).

Conclusions

Short surgeons and male surgeons reported significantly more pain after both open and robotic operations but had less physical demand when using the robotic system. Future work should focus on mitigation of surgeon height-related factors and seek to understand ergonomic gender differences beyond height.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Stucky C-CH, Cromwell KD, Voss RK et al (2018) Surgeon symptoms, strain, and selections: systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical ergonomics. Ann Med Surg 27:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Davis WT, Fletcher SA, Guillamondegui OD (2014) Musculoskeletal occupational injury among surgeons: effects for patients, providers, and institutions. J Surg Res 189(2):207-212.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.03.013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wauben L, Van Veelen M, Gossot D, Goossens R (2006) Application of ergonomic guidelines during minimally invasive surgery: a questionnaire survey of 284 surgeons. Surg Endosc Other Interv Techn 20(8):1268–1274

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Stewart CL, Ituarte PHG, Melstrom KA et al (2019) Robotic surgery trends in general surgical oncology from the National Inpatient Sample. Surg Endosc 33(8):2591–2601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6554-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H et al (2017) Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA 318(16):1569–1580. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.7219

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Barbash GI (2010) New technology and health care costs–the case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med 363(8):701

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Tarr ME, Brancato SJ, Cunkelman JA, Polcari A, Nutter B, Kenton K (2015) Comparison of postural ergonomics between laparoscopic and robotic sacrocolpopexy: a pilot study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 22(2):234–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2014.10.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Szeto GP, Poon JT, Law WL (2013) A comparison of surgeon’s postural muscle activity during robotic-assisted and laparoscopic rectal surgery. J Robot Surg 7(3):305–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-012-0374-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Law KE, Lowndes BR, Kelley SR et al (2020) NASA-Task Load Index differentiates surgical approach: opportunities for improvement in colon and rectal surgery. Ann Surg 271(5):906–912. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000003173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Plerhoples TA, Hernandez-Boussard T, Wren SM (2012) The aching surgeon: a survey of physical discomfort and symptoms following open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery. J Robot Surg 6(1):65–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-011-0330-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sutton E, Irvin M, Zeigler C, Lee G, Park A (2014) The ergonomics of women in surgery. Surg Endosc 28(4):1051–1055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Corlett EN, Bishop R (1976) A technique for assessing postural discomfort. Ergonomics 19(2):175–182

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hart SG (2006) NASA-task load index (NASA-TLX); 20 years later. Sage publications Sage CA, Los Angeles, pp 904–908

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fryar CD, Kruszan-Moran D, Gu Q, Ogden CL (2018) Mean body weight, weight, waist circumference, and body mass index among adults: United States, 1999–2000 through 2015–2016

  15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2020) Defining Adult Overweight and Obesity. Accessed Sept 28, 2020

  16. Lee G, Lee M, Green I, Allaf M, Marohn M (2017) Surgeons’ physical discomfort and symptoms during robotic surgery: a comprehensive ergonomic survey study. Surg Endosc 31(4):1697–1706

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Link BA, Nelson R, Josephson DY, Lau C, Wilson TG (2009) Training of urologic oncology fellows does not adversely impact outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Endourol 23(2):301–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Stewart CL, Dumitra S, Nota C et al (2019) Hospital factors strongly influence robotic use in general surgery. Surgery 166(5):867–872

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. BenMessaoud C, Kharrazi H, MacDorman KF (2011) Facilitators and barriers to adopting robotic-assisted surgery: contextualizing the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. PLoS ONE 6(1):e16395

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Nguyen NT, Ho HS, Smith WD et al (2001) An ergonomic evaluation of surgeons’ axial skeletal and upper extremity movements during laparoscopic and open surgery. Am J Surg 182(6):720–724

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Aghilinejad M, Ehsani AA, Talebi A, Koohpayehzadeh J, Dehghan N (2016) Ergonomic risk factors and musculoskeletal symptoms in surgeons with three types of surgery: Open, laparoscopic, and microsurgery. Med J Islam Repub Iran 30:467

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Armijo PR, Huang C-K, High R, Leon M, Siu K-C, Oleynikov D (2019) Ergonomics of minimally invasive surgery: an analysis of muscle effort and fatigue in the operating room between laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 33(7):2323–2331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Craven R, Franasiak J, Mosaly P, Gehrig PA (2013) Ergonomic deficits in robotic gynecologic oncology surgery: a need for intervention. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 20(5):648–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Acosta D (2020) Achieving excellence through equity, diversity, and inclusion. Association of American Medical Colleges. Accessed Oct 9, 2020, https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/achieving-excellence-through-equity-diversity-and-inclusion

  25. Aysola J, Barg FK, Martinez AB et al (2018) Perceptions of factors associated with inclusive work and learning environments in health care organizations: a qualitative narrative analysis. JAMA Netw Open 1(4):e181003–e181003. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.1003

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Berquer R, Smith WD, Davis S (2002) An ergonomic study of the optimum operating table height for laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc Interv Tech 16(3):416–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-001-8190-y

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Portions of this work were funded by the American Cancer Society MRSG 16–047-01-MPC. Dr. Yuman Fong has the following disclosures, all unrelated to this work: scientific consultant for Medtronic, Johnson and Johnson, Olympus, Avra Robotics, Perfint Robotics, and Intuitive Surgical.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, 12631 E. 17th Avenue, C-325, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA

    Camille Stewart

  2. Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA

    Camille Stewart, Mustafa Raoof, Yuman Fong, Thanh Dellinger & Susanne Warner

Authors
  1. Camille Stewart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mustafa Raoof
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yuman Fong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thanh Dellinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Susanne Warner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Camille Stewart.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

Drs. Camille Stewart, Mustafa Raoof, Thanh Dellinger, and Susanne Warner have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stewart, C., Raoof, M., Fong, Y. et al. Who is hurting? A prospective study of surgeon ergonomics. Surg Endosc 36, 292–299 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-08274-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-08274-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation