Skip to main content

Patient satisfaction with robotic surgery

Journal of Robotic Surgery volume 12, pages 493–499 (2018)Cite this article

Abstract

This study is a service evaluation of the robotic-assisted surgery service within the Gynaecology Oncology department at Sheffield Teaching Hospitals. The aim is not only to evaluate and improve this new service within the department, but also to add to the available literature that reviews patient satisfaction with robotic-assisted surgery. An anonymous questionnaire was developed with questions taken from the NHS User Experience Survey Question Bank and additional questions in the same format specific to robotic-assisted surgery. This was posted to the first 140 patients to have undergone robotic-assisted surgery within Gynae Oncology at STH. One hundred completed questionnaires were returned. Over 90% of patients were pleased with the care that they received pre-operatively and felt that they have enough input into the decisions made about treatment. Half of patients (51%) reported having pain post-procedure, with a quarter of these patients experiencing severe pain. The majority of patients (72%) felt that their length of stay in hospital was of the right duration. Almost all patients (99%) were pleased with the overall care that they received and 91% would recommend robotic-assisted surgery as a modality. Patients are very satisfied with the care that they receive when undergoing robotic-assisted surgery within Gynae Oncology at our center and the majority of patients would recommend robotic-assisted surgery as a modality.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Schreuder H, Verheijen R (2009) Robotic surgery. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 116:198–213

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Gaia G, Holloway RW, Santoro L, Ahmad S, Di Silverio E, Spinillo A (2010) Robotic-assisted hysterectomy for endometrial cancer compared with traditional laparoscopic and laparotomy approaches: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 116:1422–1431

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ng Ada TL, Tam PC (2014) Current status of robotic-assisted surgery. Hong Kong Med J 20:241–251

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Oehler MK (2009) Robotic-assisted surgery in gynaecology. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 49(2):124–129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Backes FJ, ElNaggar AC, Farrell MR, Brudie LA, Ahmad S, Salani R, Cohn DE, Holloway RW, Fowler JM, O’Malley DM (2016) Perioperative outcomes for laparotomy compared to robotic surgical staging of endometrial cancer in the elderly: a retrospective cohort. Int J Gynaecol Cancer 26:1717–1721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Zakhari A, Czuzoj-Shulman N, Spence AR, Gotlieb WH, Abenhaim HA (2016) Hysterectomy for uterine cancer in the elderly: a comparison between laparoscopic and robot-assisted techniques. Int J Gynaecol Cancer 26:1222–1227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Mäenpää MM, Nieminen K, Tomás EI, Laurila M, Luukkaala TH, Mäenpää JU (2016) Robotic-assisted vs traditional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynaecol 215:588.e1–588.e7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Richard G, Arms III, Sun CC, Burzawa JK, Fleming ND, Nick AM, Rallapalli V, Westin SN, Meyer LA, Ramirez PT, Soliman PT (2015) Improvement in quality of life after robotic surgery results in patient satisfaction. Gynaecol Oncol 138(3):727–730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Department of Health, UK (2012) Greater voice for patients—the health and social care bill. Factsheet B3

  10. Department of Health (2010) Equity and excellence: liberating the NHS (Coalition Government White Paper). s.l.: Department of Health

  11. Department of Health (2008) High quality care for all—NHS next stage review final report. s.l.: Department of Health

  12. Department of Health (2014) NHS outcomes framework 2015/16. s.l.: Department of Health

  13. Mulley A, Trimble C, Elwyn G (2012) Patients’ preferences matter. s.l.: The King’s Fund

  14. NHS. Question-bank. (Online). http://content.digital.nhs.uk/media/9556/Question-bank/xls/Question_Bank_-_National_and_Extended_UESv4.xlsx

  15. Quality-Health, NHS England (2014) National Cancer Patient Experience Survey. s.l.: NHS England

  16. El Douaihy Youssef et al (2011) A cohort study investigating patient expectations and satisfaction outcomes in men undergoing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. Int Urol Nephrol 43(2):405–415

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hussain A et al (2014) The use of robotics in surgery: a review. Int J Clin Pract 68(11):1376–1382

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ho C, Tsakonas E, Tran K et al (2011) Robot-assisted surgery compared with open surgery and laparoscopic surgery: clinical effectiveness and economic analyses. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health

Download references

Funding

There was no funding for this study.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Gynaecology Oncology, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK

    Emma Long & Fiona Kew

  2. Sheffield, UK

    Emma Long

Authors
  1. Emma Long
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fiona Kew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Both authors E. Long and F. Kew declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Long, E., Kew, F. Patient satisfaction with robotic surgery. J Robotic Surg 12, 493–499 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-017-0772-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-017-0772-3

Keywords

  • Patient satisfaction
  • Robotic surgery
  • Gynaecology oncology