Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Multiple perceptions of robotic-assisted surgery among surgeons and patients: a cross-sectional study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Robotic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Limited data exist regarding knowledge and perceptions of surgeons and patients about robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in the Middle East. This study aimed to explore perceptions of surgeons and patients about RAS. A questionnaire-based survey was distributed among surgeons of different specialties and patients. Between March and September 2019, 278 and 256 surveys were completed by surgeons and patients, respectively (95.2% and 94.8% response rate, respectively). The surgeons’ self-reported experience with technology was related to the level of comfort with computers and computer literacy. Most surgeons have heard of RAS availability, and the majority agreed to its introduction into the healthcare system. However, only 75 (27%) of the surgeons thought that the surgeon has complete control over the robot, and 69 (25%) surgeons were not sure of the level of control the surgeon has over the robot reflecting poor knowledge about this technology. Less than a third of patient respondents have heard of RAS. However, half of them would consider it should they need to undergo surgery. When compared to open surgery, 23 (9%), 26 (10%), and 94 (37%) patient respondents thought that RAS caused less pain, had fewer complications, and was faster than conventional surgery, respectively. Knowledge and perceptions about RAS are limited among surgeons and patients in Kuwait. Efforts should focus on increasing awareness.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Available.

References

  1. Van Koughnett JA, Jayaraman S, Eagleson R, Quan D, van Wynsberghe A, Schlachta CM (2009) Are there advantages to robotic-assisted surgery over laparoscopy from the surgeon's perspective? J Robot Surg 3(2):79–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-009-0144-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Imkamp F, Herrmann TR, Tolkach Y, Dziuba S, Stolzenburg JU, Rassweiler J, Sulser T, Zimmermann U, Merseburger AS, Kuczyk MA, Burchardt M (2015) Acceptance, prevalence and indications for robot-assisted laparoscopy—results of a survey among urologists in Germany Austria and Switzerland. Urol Int 95(3):336–345. https://doi.org/10.1159/000430502

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Azhar RA, Mobaraki AA, Badr HM, Nedal N, Nassir AM (2018) Current status of robot-assisted urologic surgery in Saudi Arabia: trends and opinions from an Internet-based survey. Urol Ann 10(3):263–269. https://doi.org/10.4103/UA.UA_8_18

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Al-Alao OPJ, Abinahed J, et al (2013) Development of robot-assisted surgery in Qatar. In: 6th Hamlyn symposium on medical robotics, Imperial College London, UK, June 2013, pp 89–90

  5. Azhar RA, Elkoushy MA, Aldousari S (2019) Robot-assisted urological surgery in the Middle East: where are we and how far can we go? Arab J Urol 17(2):106–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/2090598X.2019.1601003

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Boys JA, Alicuben ET, DeMeester MJ, Worrell SG, Oh DS, Hagen JA, DeMeester SR (2016) Public perceptions on robotic surgery, hospitals with robots, and surgeons that use them. Surg Endosc 30(4):1310–1316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4368-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ahmad A, Ahmad ZF, Carleton JD, Agarwala A (2017) Robotic surgery: current perceptions and the clinical evidence. Surg Endosc 31(1):255–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4966-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Robinson M, Macneily A, Goldenberg L, Black P (2012) Status of robotic-assisted surgery among Canadian urology residents. Can Urol Assoc J 6(3):160–167. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.11190

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. duPont NC, Chandrasekhar R, Wilding G, Guru KA (2010) Current trends in robot assisted surgery: a survey of gynecologic oncologists. Int J Med Robot 6(4):468–472. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.357

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Farivar BS, Flannagan M, Leitman IM (2015) General surgery residents' perception of robot-assisted procedures during surgical training. J Surg Educ 72(2):235–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2014.09.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Krause W, Bird J (2019) Training robotic community surgeons: our experience implementing a robotics curriculum at a rural community general surgery training program. J Robot Surg 13(3):385–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-018-0860-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Maizlin II, Shroyer MC, Yu DC, Martin CA, Chen MK, Russell RT (2017) Survey on robot-assisted surgical techniques utilization in US Pediatric Surgery Fellowships. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 27(2):186–190. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2016.0237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pickett SD, James RL, Mahajan ST (2013) Teaching robotic surgery skills: comparing the methods of generalists and subspecialists. Int J Med Robot 9(4):472–476. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1511

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wright JD, Raglan GB, Schulkin J, Fialkow MF (2017) Attitudes and beliefs regarding the utility of robotically assisted gynecologic surgery among practicing gynecologists. J Healthc Qual 39(4):211–218. https://doi.org/10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 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. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016395

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Dixon PR, Grant RC, Urbach DR (2015) The impact of marketing language on patient preference for robot-assisted surgery. Surg Innov 22(1):15–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350614537562

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Randell R, Honey S, Alvarado N, Greenhalgh J, Hindmarsh J, Pearman A, Jayne D, Gardner P, Gill A, Kotze A, Dowding D (2019) Factors supporting and constraining the implementation of robot-assisted surgery: a realist interview study. BMJ Open 9(6):e028635. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028635

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. McDermott H, Choudhury N, Lewin-Runacres M, Aemn I, Moss E (2020) Gender differences in understanding and acceptance of robot-assisted surgery. J Robot Surg 14(1):227–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-019-00960-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Poch MA, Stegemann AP, Rehman S, Sharif MA, Hussain A, Consiglio JD, Wilding GE, Guru KA (2014) Short-term patient reported health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes after robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC). BJU Int 113(2):260–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bittner Iv JG, Cesnik LW, Kirwan T, Wolf L, Guo D (2018) Patient perceptions of acute pain and activity disruption following inguinal hernia repair: a propensity-matched comparison of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open approaches. J Robot Surg 12(4):625–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-018-0790-9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

SAA and AJB: conception and design, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the article, critical revision, and final approval. SMY: distribution and collection of surveys, analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the article, critical revision, and final approval. RJA and ANA: distribution and collection of surveys, critical revision, and final approval.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saad A. Aldousari.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Authors Saad A. Aldousari, Ali J. Buabbas, Said M. Yaiesh, Rawan J. Alyousef, and Abdullah N. Alenezi declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000.

Informed consent

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

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

Aldousari, S.A., Buabbas, A.J., Yaiesh, S.M. et al. Multiple perceptions of robotic-assisted surgery among surgeons and patients: a cross-sectional study. J Robotic Surg 15, 529–538 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-020-01136-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-020-01136-w

Keywords

Navigation