Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Assessment of fatigue, monitor placement, and surgical experience during simulated laparoscopic surgery

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic surgery requires the surgeon to assume atypical postures for extended periods of time, potentially leading to fatigue and chronic injury. This study assessed the level of muscle activity and compared the effects of fatigue, monitor placement, and surgical experience during simulated laparoscopic surgery.

Methods

Four attending and four resident surgeons repeated a series of four tasks with a Viewsite and a standard operating room monitor. Electromyography (EMG) activity and muscular discomfort scores were obtained before and after a “fatigue session.” Two variables, the EMG amplitudes and discomfort scores, were analyzed.

Results

The EMG amplitudes generally exceed the recommended threshold limits of acceptable muscular load. EMG data and discomfort scores demonstrated a fatigue response in several muscle groups. Minimal differences between the two monitor positions were seen. Overall, the EMG data and discomfort scores showed less muscle activity and discomfort in the attending surgeons.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic surgery required a relatively high muscular load, putting surgeons at risk for fatigue and injury. Altering the monitor placement did not reduce the surgeon’s risk of fatigue. Experience slightly reduced the level of fatigue, but not enough to reduce the surgeon’s risk category.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arndt R (1983) Working posture and musculoskeletal problems of video display terminal operators — review and reappraisal. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 44: 431–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Basmajian JV, DeLuca CJ (1985) Muscles alive their functions revealed by electromyography. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, MD

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Berguer R, Remler M, Beckley D (1997) Laparoscopic instruments cause increased forearm fatigue: a subjective and objective comparison of open and laparoscopic techniques. Minimally Invasive Ther Allied Technol 36–40

  5. Christensen H (1986) Muscle activity and fatigue in the shoulder muscles during repetitive work. An electromyographic study. Eur J Appl Physiol 54: 596–601

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cuschieri A (1995) Whither minimal access surgery: tribulations and expectations. Am J Surg 169: 9–19

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hammarskjold E, Harms-Ringdahl K (1992) Effect of arm-shoulder fatigue on carpenters at work. Eur J Appl Physiol 64: 402–409

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Jensen BR, Schibye B, Sogaard K, Simonsen EB, Sjogaard G (1993) Shoulder muscle load and muscle fatigue among industrial sewing-machine operators. Eur J Appl Physiol 67: 467–475

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Jonsson B (1978) Quantitative electromyographic evaluation of muscular load during work. Scand J Rehabil Med Suppl 6: 69–74

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kendall FP, McCreary EK, Provance PG (1993) Muscles testing and function. William & Wilkins, Baltimore, MD

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kvarnstrom S (1983) Occurrence of musculoskeletal disorders in a manufacturing industry with special attention to occupational shoulder disorders. Scand J Rehabil Med Suppl 8: 1–114

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mathiassen SE, Aminoff T (1997) Motor control and cardiovascular responses during isoelectric contractions of the upper trapezius muscle: evidence for individual adaptation strategies. Eur J Appl Physiol 76: 434–444

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Milerad E, Ericson MO (1994) Effects of precision and force demands, grip diameter, and arm support during manual work: an electromyographic study. Ergonomics 37: 255–264

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Milerad E, Ericson MO, Nisell R, Kilbom A (1991) An electromyographic study of dental work. Ergonomics 34: 953–962

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Palmerud G, Kadefors R, Sporrong H, Jarvholm U, Herberts P, Hogfors C, Peterson B (1995) Voluntary redistribution of muscle activity in human shoulder muscles. Ergonomics 38: 806–815

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Patkin M, Isabel L (1995) Ergonomics, engineering and surgery of endosurgical dissection. J R Coll Surg Edinburgh 40: 120–132

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Underwood RA, Luttmann DR, Soper NJ, Halpin VJ, Shannon WD, Burguer R (2000) Musculoskeletal discomfort to performance of surgical procedures — development of a subjective discomfort [abstract]. Surg Endosc 14: S224

    Google Scholar 

  18. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) (1992) Selected topics in surface electromyography for use in the occupational setting: expert perspectives [pamphlet]. DHHS, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Yang JF, Winter DA (1983) Electromyography reliability in maximal and submaximal isometric contractions. Arch Phys Med Rehab 64: 417–420

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Uhrich, M.L., Underwood, R.A., Standeven, J.W. et al. Assessment of fatigue, monitor placement, and surgical experience during simulated laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 16, 635–639 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-001-8151-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-001-8151-5

Key words

Navigation