Ergonomics of minimally invasive surgery: an analysis of muscle effort and fatigue in the operating room between laparoscopic and robotic surgery

Priscila R. Armijo, Chun Kai Huang, Robin High, Melissa Leon, Joseph Ka-Chun Siu, Dmitry Oleynikov

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Our aim was to determine how objectively-measured and self-reported muscle effort and fatigue of the upper-limb differ between surgeons performing laparoscopic (LAP) and robotic-assisted (ROBOT) surgeries. Methods: Surgeons performing LAP or ROBOT procedures at a single-institution were enrolled. Objective muscle activation and self-reported fatigue were evaluated, and comparisons were made between approaches. Muscle activation of the upper trapezius (UT), anterior deltoid (AD), flexor carpi radialis (FCR), and extensor digitorum (ED) were recorded during the surgical procedure using Trigno wireless surface electromyography (EMG). The maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) was obtained to normalize root-mean-square muscle activation as %MVCRMS. The median frequency (MDF) was calculated to assess muscle fatigue. Each surgeon also completed the validated Piper Fatigue Scale-12 (PFH-12) before and after the procedure for self-perceived fatigue assessment. Statistical analysis was done using SAS/STAT software, with α = 0.05. Results: 28 surgeries were recorded (LAP: N = 18, ROBOT: N = 10). EMG analysis revealed the ROBOT group had a higher muscle activation than LAP for UT (37.7 vs. 25.5, p = 0.003), AD (8.9 vs. 6.3, p = 0.027), and FCR (14.4 vs. 10.9, p = 0.019). Conversely, LAP required more effort for the ED, represented by a significantly lower MDF compared to the ROBOT group (91.2 ± 1.5 Hz vs. 102.8 ± 1.5 Hz, p < 0.001). Survey analysis revealed no differences in self-reported fatigue before and after the surgery between approaches, p = 0.869. Conclusions: Our analysis revealed surgeons show similar fatigue levels performing the first case of the day using either robotic or LAP surgery. Surgeons performing LAP surgery had more fatigue in the forearm, robotic surgery required more shoulder and neck use, but neither was superior. Neither technique produced significant overall fatigue on survey. Long-term selective use of these different muscles could be correlated with different patterns of injury. Future studies are needed to fully understand long-term implications of prolonged surgery on occupational injury.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2323-2331
Number of pages9
JournalSurgical endoscopy
Volume33
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 15 2019

Fingerprint

Muscle Fatigue
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures
Human Engineering
Robotics
Operating Rooms
Laparoscopy
Fatigue
Muscles
Superficial Back Muscles
Electromyography
Piper
Occupational Injuries
Forearm
Upper Extremity
Neck
Software
Surgeons
Wounds and Injuries

Keywords

  • Electromyography
  • Ergonomics
  • Minimally invasive surgery
  • Robotic surgery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Ergonomics of minimally invasive surgery : an analysis of muscle effort and fatigue in the operating room between laparoscopic and robotic surgery. / Armijo, Priscila R.; Huang, Chun Kai; High, Robin; Leon, Melissa; Siu, Joseph Ka-Chun; Oleynikov, Dmitry.

In: Surgical endoscopy, Vol. 33, No. 7, 15.07.2019, p. 2323-2331.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Armijo, Priscila R. ; Huang, Chun Kai ; High, Robin ; Leon, Melissa ; Siu, Joseph Ka-Chun ; Oleynikov, Dmitry. / Ergonomics of minimally invasive surgery : an analysis of muscle effort and fatigue in the operating room between laparoscopic and robotic surgery. In: Surgical endoscopy. 2019 ; Vol. 33, No. 7. pp. 2323-2331.
@article{05d84d52e4be44b8896e97850ea5af15,
title = "Ergonomics of minimally invasive surgery: an analysis of muscle effort and fatigue in the operating room between laparoscopic and robotic surgery",
abstract = "Background: Our aim was to determine how objectively-measured and self-reported muscle effort and fatigue of the upper-limb differ between surgeons performing laparoscopic (LAP) and robotic-assisted (ROBOT) surgeries. Methods: Surgeons performing LAP or ROBOT procedures at a single-institution were enrolled. Objective muscle activation and self-reported fatigue were evaluated, and comparisons were made between approaches. Muscle activation of the upper trapezius (UT), anterior deltoid (AD), flexor carpi radialis (FCR), and extensor digitorum (ED) were recorded during the surgical procedure using Trigno wireless surface electromyography (EMG). The maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) was obtained to normalize root-mean-square muscle activation as {\%}MVCRMS. The median frequency (MDF) was calculated to assess muscle fatigue. Each surgeon also completed the validated Piper Fatigue Scale-12 (PFH-12) before and after the procedure for self-perceived fatigue assessment. Statistical analysis was done using SAS/STAT software, with α = 0.05. Results: 28 surgeries were recorded (LAP: N = 18, ROBOT: N = 10). EMG analysis revealed the ROBOT group had a higher muscle activation than LAP for UT (37.7 vs. 25.5, p = 0.003), AD (8.9 vs. 6.3, p = 0.027), and FCR (14.4 vs. 10.9, p = 0.019). Conversely, LAP required more effort for the ED, represented by a significantly lower MDF compared to the ROBOT group (91.2 ± 1.5 Hz vs. 102.8 ± 1.5 Hz, p < 0.001). Survey analysis revealed no differences in self-reported fatigue before and after the surgery between approaches, p = 0.869. Conclusions: Our analysis revealed surgeons show similar fatigue levels performing the first case of the day using either robotic or LAP surgery. Surgeons performing LAP surgery had more fatigue in the forearm, robotic surgery required more shoulder and neck use, but neither was superior. Neither technique produced significant overall fatigue on survey. Long-term selective use of these different muscles could be correlated with different patterns of injury. Future studies are needed to fully understand long-term implications of prolonged surgery on occupational injury.",
keywords = "Electromyography, Ergonomics, Minimally invasive surgery, Robotic surgery",
author = "Armijo, {Priscila R.} and Huang, {Chun Kai} and Robin High and Melissa Leon and Siu, {Joseph Ka-Chun} and Dmitry Oleynikov",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1007/s00464-018-6515-3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "33",
pages = "2323--2331",
journal = "Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques",
issn = "0930-2794",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ergonomics of minimally invasive surgery

T2 - an analysis of muscle effort and fatigue in the operating room between laparoscopic and robotic surgery

AU - Armijo, Priscila R.

AU - Huang, Chun Kai

AU - High, Robin

AU - Leon, Melissa

AU - Siu, Joseph Ka-Chun

AU - Oleynikov, Dmitry

PY - 2019/7/15

Y1 - 2019/7/15

N2 - Background: Our aim was to determine how objectively-measured and self-reported muscle effort and fatigue of the upper-limb differ between surgeons performing laparoscopic (LAP) and robotic-assisted (ROBOT) surgeries. Methods: Surgeons performing LAP or ROBOT procedures at a single-institution were enrolled. Objective muscle activation and self-reported fatigue were evaluated, and comparisons were made between approaches. Muscle activation of the upper trapezius (UT), anterior deltoid (AD), flexor carpi radialis (FCR), and extensor digitorum (ED) were recorded during the surgical procedure using Trigno wireless surface electromyography (EMG). The maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) was obtained to normalize root-mean-square muscle activation as %MVCRMS. The median frequency (MDF) was calculated to assess muscle fatigue. Each surgeon also completed the validated Piper Fatigue Scale-12 (PFH-12) before and after the procedure for self-perceived fatigue assessment. Statistical analysis was done using SAS/STAT software, with α = 0.05. Results: 28 surgeries were recorded (LAP: N = 18, ROBOT: N = 10). EMG analysis revealed the ROBOT group had a higher muscle activation than LAP for UT (37.7 vs. 25.5, p = 0.003), AD (8.9 vs. 6.3, p = 0.027), and FCR (14.4 vs. 10.9, p = 0.019). Conversely, LAP required more effort for the ED, represented by a significantly lower MDF compared to the ROBOT group (91.2 ± 1.5 Hz vs. 102.8 ± 1.5 Hz, p < 0.001). Survey analysis revealed no differences in self-reported fatigue before and after the surgery between approaches, p = 0.869. Conclusions: Our analysis revealed surgeons show similar fatigue levels performing the first case of the day using either robotic or LAP surgery. Surgeons performing LAP surgery had more fatigue in the forearm, robotic surgery required more shoulder and neck use, but neither was superior. Neither technique produced significant overall fatigue on survey. Long-term selective use of these different muscles could be correlated with different patterns of injury. Future studies are needed to fully understand long-term implications of prolonged surgery on occupational injury.

AB - Background: Our aim was to determine how objectively-measured and self-reported muscle effort and fatigue of the upper-limb differ between surgeons performing laparoscopic (LAP) and robotic-assisted (ROBOT) surgeries. Methods: Surgeons performing LAP or ROBOT procedures at a single-institution were enrolled. Objective muscle activation and self-reported fatigue were evaluated, and comparisons were made between approaches. Muscle activation of the upper trapezius (UT), anterior deltoid (AD), flexor carpi radialis (FCR), and extensor digitorum (ED) were recorded during the surgical procedure using Trigno wireless surface electromyography (EMG). The maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) was obtained to normalize root-mean-square muscle activation as %MVCRMS. The median frequency (MDF) was calculated to assess muscle fatigue. Each surgeon also completed the validated Piper Fatigue Scale-12 (PFH-12) before and after the procedure for self-perceived fatigue assessment. Statistical analysis was done using SAS/STAT software, with α = 0.05. Results: 28 surgeries were recorded (LAP: N = 18, ROBOT: N = 10). EMG analysis revealed the ROBOT group had a higher muscle activation than LAP for UT (37.7 vs. 25.5, p = 0.003), AD (8.9 vs. 6.3, p = 0.027), and FCR (14.4 vs. 10.9, p = 0.019). Conversely, LAP required more effort for the ED, represented by a significantly lower MDF compared to the ROBOT group (91.2 ± 1.5 Hz vs. 102.8 ± 1.5 Hz, p < 0.001). Survey analysis revealed no differences in self-reported fatigue before and after the surgery between approaches, p = 0.869. Conclusions: Our analysis revealed surgeons show similar fatigue levels performing the first case of the day using either robotic or LAP surgery. Surgeons performing LAP surgery had more fatigue in the forearm, robotic surgery required more shoulder and neck use, but neither was superior. Neither technique produced significant overall fatigue on survey. Long-term selective use of these different muscles could be correlated with different patterns of injury. Future studies are needed to fully understand long-term implications of prolonged surgery on occupational injury.

KW - Electromyography

KW - Ergonomics

KW - Minimally invasive surgery

KW - Robotic surgery

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055499673&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85055499673&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00464-018-6515-3

DO - 10.1007/s00464-018-6515-3

M3 - Article

C2 - 30341653

AN - SCOPUS:85055499673

VL - 33

SP - 2323

EP - 2331

JO - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques

JF - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques

SN - 0930-2794

IS - 7

ER -