Intraoperative workload of the surgeon in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review.


Journal

Journal of robotic surgery
ISSN: 1863-2491
Titre abrégé: J Robot Surg
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101300401

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
22 Jul 2024
Historique:
received: 08 06 2024
accepted: 13 07 2024
medline: 23 7 2024
pubmed: 23 7 2024
entrez: 22 7 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

In the present study, we aimed to systematically evaluate the current evidence regarding the intraoperative workload of surgeons performing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for prostate cancer. A systematic search was carried out in the PubMed-MEDLINE and Web of Science databases through April 2024 using the following search terms: "workload AND robot assisted radical prostatectomy", "workload AND robotic radical prostatectomy", "task load AND robotic radical prostatectomy", "task load AND robot assisted radical prostatectomy" and "NASA-TLX AND robot assisted radical prostatectomy" by combining population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) terms, following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We therefore selected studies that included patients with prostate cancer (P) who underwent robotic radical prostatectomy (I) and reported a workload/task load questionnaire (C) to assess the intraoperative workload/task load of the surgeon performing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (O). A total of 11 studies were identified. The surgeon's workload during RARP was assessed using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration task load index (NASA-TLX) and/or the surgery task load index (SURG-TLX) in the studies. Total NASA-TLX scores of the studies ranged from 22.7 ± 3.2 to 62.0 ± 6.4. Mental and physical demands, flow interruptions, surgeon experience, the use of single or multiple ports, and the relationship between the surgeon and other staff in the operating theater may play a role in the intraoperative workload of the console surgeon. The studies we reviewed suggest that RARP offers an acceptable workload for the console surgeon despite its mental demands.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39039389
doi: 10.1007/s11701-024-02049-8
pii: 10.1007/s11701-024-02049-8
doi:

Types de publication

Systematic Review Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

289

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature.

Références

Costello AJ (2020) Considering the role of radical prostatectomy in 21st century prostate cancer care. Nat Rev Urol 17:177–188. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41585-020-0287-y
doi: 10.1038/s41585-020-0287-y pubmed: 32086498
Binder J, Kramer W (2001) Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 87:408–410. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.2001.00115.x
doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2001.00115.x pubmed: 11251539
Ilic D, Evans SM, Allan CA, Jung JH, Murphy D, Frydenberg M (2017) Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 9:Cd009625. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009625.pub2
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009625.pub2 pubmed: 28895658
Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody J (2003) Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: technique. J Urol 169:2289–2292. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000067464.53313.dd
doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000067464.53313.dd pubmed: 12771773
Schuessler WW, Schulam PG, Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR (1997) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology 50:854–857. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-4295(97)00543-8
doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(97)00543-8 pubmed: 9426713
Smith JA Jr, Herrell SD (2005) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: do minimally invasive approaches offer significant advantages? J Clin Oncol 23:8170–8175. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2005.03.1963
doi: 10.1200/jco.2005.03.1963 pubmed: 16278469
Weigl M, Stefan P, Abhari K, Wucherer P, Fallavollita P, Lazarovici M, Weidert S, Euler E, Catchpole K (2016) Intra-operative disruptions, surgeon’s mental workload, and technical performance in a full-scale simulated procedure. Surg Endosc 30:559–566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4239-1
doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4239-1 pubmed: 26091986
Yu D, Lowndes B, Thiels C, Bingener J, Abdelrahman A, Lyons R, Hallbeck S (2016) Quantifying intraoperative workloads across the surgical team roles: room for better balance? World J Surg 40:1565–1574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3449-6
doi: 10.1007/s00268-016-3449-6 pubmed: 26952115 pmcid: 4894937
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R, Glanville J, Grimshaw JM, Hróbjartsson A, Lalu MM, Li T, Loder EW, Mayo-Wilson E, McDonald S, McGuinness LA, Stewart LA, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Welch VA, Whiting P, Moher D (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71 pubmed: 33782057 pmcid: 8005924
Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 6:e1000100. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 pubmed: 19621070 pmcid: 2707010
Linde K, Lehnig F, Nagl M, Kersting A (2020) The association between breastfeeding and attachment: a systematic review. Midwifery 81:102592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2019.102592
doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2019.102592 pubmed: 31830673
Musshafen LA, Tyrone RS, Abdelaziz A, Sims-Gomillia CE, Pongetti LS, Teng F, Fletcher LM, Reneker JC (2021) Associations between sleep and academic performance in US adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sleep Med 83:71–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sleep.2021.04.015
doi: 10.1016/j.sleep.2021.04.015 pubmed: 33991893
Hart SG, Staveland LE (1988) Development of NASA-TLX (task load index): results of empirical and theoretical research. Adv Psychol 52:139–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9
doi: 10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9
Dye ME, Runyan P, Scott TA, Dietrich MS, Hatch LD, France D, Alrifai MW (2023) Workload in neonatology (WORKLINE): validation and feasibility of a system for measuring clinician workload integrated into the electronic health record. J Perinatol 43:936–942. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-023-01678-5
doi: 10.1038/s41372-023-01678-5 pubmed: 37131049
Lund S, Yan M, D’Angelo J, Wang T, Hallbeck MS, Heller S, Zielinski M (2021) NASA-TLX assessment of workload in resident physicians and faculty surgeons covering trauma, surgical intensive care unit, and emergency general surgery services. Am J Surg 222:1158–1162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.10.020
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.10.020 pubmed: 34689977
Tubbs-Cooley HL, Mara CA, Carle AC, Mark BA, Pickler RH (2019) Association of nurse workload with missed nursing care in the neonatal intensive care unit. JAMA Pediatr 173:44–51. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.3619
doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.3619 pubmed: 30419138
Zheng B, Jiang X, Tien G, Meneghetti A, Panton ON, Atkins MS (2012) Workload assessment of surgeons: correlation between NASA TLX and blinks. Surg Endosc 26:2746–2750. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2268-6
doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2268-6 pubmed: 22527300
Wilson MR, Poolton JM, Malhotra N, Ngo K, Bright E, Masters RS (2011) Development and validation of a surgical workload measure: the surgery task load index (SURG-TLX). World J Surg 35:1961–1969. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1141-4
doi: 10.1007/s00268-011-1141-4 pubmed: 21597890 pmcid: 3152702
Cavuoto LA, Hussein AA, Vasan V, Ahmed Y, Durrani A, Khan S, Cole A, Wang D, Kozlowski J, Ahmad B, Guru KA (2017) Improving teamwork: evaluating workload of surgical team during robot-assisted surgery. Urology 107:120–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.05.012
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.05.012 pubmed: 28579070
Fan S, Zhang Z, Wang J, Xiong S, Dai X, Chen X, Li Z, Han G, Zhu J, Hao H, Yu W, Cui L, Shen C, Li X, Zhou L (2022) Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using the KangDuo surgical robot-01 system: a prospective, single-center, single-arm clinical study. J Urol 208:119–127. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002498
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000002498 pubmed: 35442762
Guru KA, Shafiei SB, Khan A, Hussein AA, Sharif M, Esfahani ET (2015) Understanding cognitive performance during robot-assisted surgery. Urology 86:751–757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.07.028
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.07.028 pubmed: 26255037
Jing T, Peng D, Yao X, Ye S, Zhao Q, Ni M, Shao J, Xu X, He A, Liang Z, Lai C, Qi H, Meng H, Wang P, Wang S, Xia D (2023) Single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with the novel shurui single-port robotic surgical system. J Endourol 37:1105–1112. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2023.0185
doi: 10.1089/end.2023.0185 pubmed: 37597208
Koch A, Quartucci C, Buchner A, Schlenker B, Becker A, Catchpole K, Weigl M (2023) Associations of flow disruptions with patient, staff, and process outcomes: a prospective observational study of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies. Surg Endosc 37:6964–6974. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-10162-2
doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10162-2 pubmed: 37336845 pmcid: 10462499
Norasi H, Tetteh E, Law KE, Ponnala S, Hallbeck MS, Tollefson M (2022) Intraoperative workload during robotic radical prostatectomy: Comparison between multi-port da Vinci Xi and single port da Vinci SP robots. Appl Ergon 104:103826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2022.103826
doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2022.103826 pubmed: 35724472
Sexton K, Johnson A, Gotsch A, Hussein AA, Cavuoto L, Guru KA (2018) Anticipation, teamwork and cognitive load: chasing efficiency during robot-assisted surgery. BMJ Qual Saf 27:148–154. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2017-006701
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2017-006701 pubmed: 28689193
Talamini S, Halgrimson WR, Dobbs RW, Morana C, Crivellaro S (2021) Single port robotic radical prostatectomy versus multi-port robotic radical prostatectomy: a human factor analysis during the initial learning curve. Int J Med Robot 17:e2209. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2209
doi: 10.1002/rcs.2209 pubmed: 33320437
Weber J, Catchpole K, Becker AJ, Schlenker B, Weigl M (2018) Effects of flow disruptions on mental workload and surgical performance in robotic-assisted surgery. World J Surg 42:3599–3607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-018-4689-4
doi: 10.1007/s00268-018-4689-4 pubmed: 29845381
Yu D, Dural C, Morrow MM, Yang L, Collins JW, Hallbeck S, Kjellman M, Forsman M (2017) Intraoperative workload in robotic surgery assessed by wearable motion tracking sensors and questionnaires. Surg Endosc 31:877–886. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5047-y
doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5047-y pubmed: 27495330
Ahmed Y, Lone Z, Hussein AA, Feng Y, Khan H, Broad S, Kannappan R, Skowronski A, Cole A, Wang D, Stone K, Hasasneh A, Sexton K, Gotsch A, Ali T, Braun J, Khan S, Durrani A, Durrani M, Guru KA (2019) Do surgeon non-technical skills correlate with teamwork-related outcomes during robot-assisted surgery? BMJ Leader 3:69–74. https://doi.org/10.1136/leader-2018-000128
doi: 10.1136/leader-2018-000128
Hooey BL, Kaber DB, Adams JA, Fong TW, Gore BF (2018) The underpinnings of workload in unmanned vehicle systems. IEEE Trans Human-Mach Syst 48:452–467. https://doi.org/10.1109/thms.2017.2759758
doi: 10.1109/thms.2017.2759758
Mazur LM, Mosaly PR, Hoyle LM, Jones EL, Chera BS, Marks LB (2014) Relating physician’s workload with errors during radiation therapy planning. Pract Radiat Oncol 4:71–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prro.2013.05.010
doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2013.05.010 pubmed: 24890346
Hertzum M (2021) Reference values and subscale patterns for the task load index (TLX): a meta-analytic review. Ergonomics 64:869–878. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2021.1876927
doi: 10.1080/00140139.2021.1876927 pubmed: 33463402
Weigl M, Weber J, Hallett E, Pfandler M, Schlenker B, Becker A, Catchpole K (2018) Associations of intraoperative flow disruptions and operating room teamwork during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. Urology 114:105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.11.060
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.11.060 pubmed: 29371162
Arora S, Sevdalis N, Nestel D, Woloshynowych M, Darzi A, Kneebone R (2010) The impact of stress on surgical performance: a systematic review of the literature. Surgery 147(318–330):330.e311–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2009.10.007
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2009.10.007
Fan X, Forsman M, Yang L, Lind CM, Kjellman M (2022) Surgeons’ physical workload in open surgery versus robot-assisted surgery and nonsurgical tasks. Surg Endosc 36:8178–8194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09256-0
doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09256-0 pubmed: 35589973 pmcid: 9613719
Hubert N, Gilles M, Desbrosses K, Meyer JP, Felblinger J, Hubert J (2013) Ergonomic assessment of the surgeon’s physical workload during standard and robotic assisted laparoscopic procedures. Int J Med Robot 9:142–147. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1489
doi: 10.1002/rcs.1489 pubmed: 23529792
Catanzarite T, Tan-Kim J, Whitcomb EL, Menefee S (2018) Ergonomics in surgery: a review. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 24:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/spv.0000000000000456
doi: 10.1097/spv.0000000000000456 pubmed: 28914699
Nasirizad Moghadam K, Chehrzad MM, Reza Masouleh S, Maleki M, Mardani A, Atharyan S, Harding C (2021) Nursing physical workload and mental workload in intensive care units: are they related? Nurs Open 8:1625–1633. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.785
doi: 10.1002/nop2.785 pubmed: 33596333 pmcid: 8186696
Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Karsh BT (2010) Interruptions and distractions in healthcare: review and reappraisal. Qual Saf Health Care 19:304–312. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2009.033282
doi: 10.1136/qshc.2009.033282 pubmed: 20378621
Leppink J, Paas F, van Gog T, van der Vleuten CPM, van Merriënboer JJG (2014) Effects of pairs of problems and examples on task performance and different types of cognitive load. Learn Instr 30:32–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.12.001
doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.12.001
Armour Forse R, Bramble JD, McQuillan R (2011) Team training can improve operating room performance. Surgery 150:771–778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2011.07.076
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2011.07.076 pubmed: 22000190
Mathis MR, Yule S, Wu X, Dias RD, Janda AM, Krein SL, Manojlovich M, Caldwell MD, Stakich-Alpirez K, Zhang M, Corso J, Louis N, Xu T, Wolverton J, Pagani FD, Likosky DS (2021) The impact of team familiarity on intra and postoperative cardiac surgical outcomes. Surgery 170:1031–1038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2021.05.020
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2021.05.020 pubmed: 34148709

Auteurs

Mehmet Yilmaz (M)

Urology, MediClin Kraichgau-Klinik, Fritz-Hagner-Promenade 15, 74906, Bad Rappenau, Germany. yilmazmehmet88@hotmail.com.

Mustafa Karaaslan (M)

Department of Urology, Bayindir Healthcare Group Kavaklidere Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.

Mehmet Emin Şirin (ME)

Clinic of Urology, Private Inova Hospital, Aksaray, Turkey.

Muhammed Emin Polat (ME)

Department of Urology, Ankara City Hospital, University of Health Sciences, Ankara, Turkey.

Halil Çağrı Aybal (HÇ)

Clinic of Urology, Polatlı Duatepe State Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.

Tuncay Toprak (T)

Department of Urology, Fatih Sultan Mehmet Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey.

Senol Tonyali (S)

Department of Urology, Istanbul University Istanbul School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH