Norasi, Hamid

Background Surgeons face elevated risks of musculoskeletal disorders due to prolonged operating times, awkward postures, and repetitive tasks, which can impair performance and well-being. Microbreaks have emerged as a potential ergonomic intervention to reduce discomfort and fatigue during surgery. Objective The main goal of this study was to investigate and compare the intraoperative usability and effectiveness of two break scheduling strategies using the OR-Stretch TM Web-App. Furthermore, surgeons’ feedback on the primary barriers to implementation of the OR-Stretch Web-App was recorded. Methods This study used a randomized, within-subjects crossover design. Fourteen surgeons (eight females) performed three surgical procedures with the following microbreak schedules; (1) microbreaks every 30 min with an optional ten-minute snooze (Break-30), (2) microbreaks every 60 min with an optional ten-minute snooze (Break-60), or (3) no microbreaks (Baseline). Outcomes were measured using self-reported subjective surveys (e.g., discomfort, fatigue, workload, and usability). Results Surgeons found both Break-30 and Break-60 conditions aided physical performance, mental focus, body pain/discomfort, and level of fatigue (self-reported improvement between 28.6% and 78.6%). No significant differences were observed in surgeons’ subjective evaluations of the Break-30 and Break-60 conditions; however, the data suggest that Break-60 is preferable to the Break-30 condition. Conclusions This study provides evidence supporting the OR-Stretch Web-App as a potential surgical ergonomic intervention. However, enhancing the Web-App's user-friendliness and developing strategies to synchronize microbreaks with appropriate times during surgeries, to avoid disrupting the surgical workflow, are critical areas for future studies.

A positive margin following tumor resection (i.e., surgical removal of a cancerous tumor) indicates that cancer may remain in the body and can require a re-operation. This study is part of a larger project designing a technology to support the intraoperative evaluation of margins. This study explores the goals, decisions, information needs, and system requirements of a surgeon performing breast cancer surgery. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 breast surgeons to understand how they currently perform resections and then performed a qualitative thematic analysis. We identified three main goals and 13 subgoals. The three main goals are: treating cancer, meeting patient needs, and meeting institutional needs. Surgeons made multiple decisions to accomplish each sub goal and required multiple information elements to make these decisions. Our results will inform the design of the new technology and a sociotechnical systems-based analysis to ensure the technology fits in surgeon workflow.

Achieving negative surgical margins is critical for patient outcomes in breast-conserving surgery (BCS), however positive margins require reoperation in 20% to 40% of cases currently. This study explores design criteria and current barriers and facilitators to margin definition and assessment as part of designing an intraoperative tool for margin assessment during BCS. We conducted observations of nine surgeries by four surgeons at a quaternary medical center. We analyzed the data using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model to identify barriers and facilitators to margin assessment. We identified 38 barriers and 62 facilitators, which we inductively categorized into dimensions. The dimensions included teamwork, information display design, intraoperative tool use, and tissue characteristics. Teamwork was the most frequently observed dimension, followed by information display design and intraoperative tool use. This study provides insights to support the design of workflow-adaptive solutions and improve margin accuracy and surgical performance in breast oncology procedures.

Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is a standard treatment for breast cancer, but achieving clear negative margins to avoid re-excision remains a challenge. Current intraoperative margin assessment techniques, such as frozen section analysis and imprint cytology, are limited by resource demands and workflow integration challenges. This study explores the physical design considerations for a handheld intraoperative imaging probe to assess tumor cavity margins during BCS. Data were collected through 9 surgical observations, 11 semi-structured interviews with breast surgeons, and interdisciplinary team meetings. Inductive thematic analysis identified key design priorities, including ergonomic handling, flexible probe tips, consistent tissue contact, and compatibility with both direct and tunneled access. Surgeons emphasized the need for quick scanning times and binary margin outputs, with interest in supplementary real-time imaging. These findings offer foundational insights for the iterative development of a clinically viable margin assessment tool aimed at reducing re-excisions and improving surgical outcomes in breast cancer care.

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of an intraoperative exoskeleton that supports surgeons’ heads, necks, and backs to reduce neck discomfort. Background: Surgeons are at a considerable risk of developing neck pain and related injuries. Passive exoskeletons are a potential intervention to support surgeons’ body parts and alleviate strain and discomfort. Methods: The NekSpine (a passive neck exoskeleton) was trialed on 12 surgeons (7 males and 5 females) across 6 specialties. Each surgeon performed 4 surgical procedures, 2 with the NekSpine (exoskeleton) and 2 without (baseline). Exoskeleton and baseline surgeries were paired primarily by surgical procedure and secondarily by duration. Surgeons completed surveys that included the NASA-TLX and usability questions before and after surgical procedures to evaluate body part discomfort, overall fatigue, workload, and potential disruptions to the surgical workflow. Surgeons also wore inertial measurement units to objectively record their upper arms, neck, and torso postures. Results: Use of the exoskeleton yielded significant decreases in discomfort in the neck, left shoulder, right shoulder, and left arm. Reductions in percent surgical duration in risk 4 (extreme risk postures) coupled with increases spent in risk 2 (moderate risk postures) for the neck and torso were noted. Surgeons reported overall favorable usability results with the exoskeleton not interfering with the surgical workflow, and most stated that they would use the exoskeleton again. Conclusions: The NekSpine is a promising intervention to alleviate surgeons’ neck discomfort and improve their neck and torso postures.

Objective: To examine perceived operating room (OR) ergonomics facilitators and barriers, with a focus on the interdisciplinary team. Background: Poor ergonomics causes musculoskeletal injuries affecting all OR staff with repercussions on patient care, outcomes, and sustainability. Lack of ergonomic awareness and education are risk factors. Methods: We conducted a self-administered web-based survey of OR nurses, surgeons, and anesthesiologists at a single center (n = 238). We developed a questionnaire through item generation and reduction, followed by reliability and validity testing. Results: Response rate was 53.8%. Respondents perceived that on average 80% of nurses, 70% of surgeons, and 40% of anesthesiologists experienced musculoskeletal (MSK) injuries, with no difference in professional groups’ perceptions. Guideline ergonomics interventions were rarely used (<25%) except for specialized clothing (33%), equipment repositioning (59%), and seating (37%), though perceived as beneficial by 80% to 90%. Reported barriers to optimal ergonomics were organizational/structural (lack of time, space, equipment, funding), whereas solutions were individual. Fear of unfavorable perceptions from others was a concern for 62%. Teams discussing, prioritizing, monitoring, or helping with ergonomics was indicated by <50%. Individual ergonomic adaptations were perceived as convenience by other staff. Conclusions: While structural/organizational issues are reported as barriers to ergonomics, solutions appear as individual responsibilities. Team dynamics did not prioritize nor support ergonomics. Education tools leveraging the interdisciplinary team are warranted. This work will be supplemented by interviews and live observations to build tailored educational tools for OR teams.

Burnout is a challenging issue among surgeons. Many factors have been linked to burnout, such as an inadequate work-life balance, high stress levels, and the frequency of on-call, overnight shifts. There is a lack of research on factors in surgeons’ daily lives associated with burnout. This study observed trauma surgeons with daily surveys assessing stress and fatigue over 9 days (6 day shifts, three night shifts). This study analyzes surgeons’ stress and fatigue levels. The study population was compared to the population of US critical care surgeons to ensure representativeness based on age, sex, and rates of burnout. Overnight shifts showed high stress and fatigue levels relative to off days, day shifts, the 3 days before, and the 3 days after overnight shifts. Days performing surgery were also more stressful and fatiguing than non-surgery work days and off days. Fatigue and stress levels were minimized during off days.

Ergonomic microbreaks such as the OR-Stretch can address work-related musculoskeletal pain among surgeons and potentially alleviate burnout and early retirement. Fifteen surgeons at a single institution completed two operative cases using the OR-Stretch, once using the Scheduled (every 45 min) timing strategy and once using the Self-Determined (between 30 and 60 min based on surgeon preference) strategy. Eight surgeons preferred the Scheduled timing strategy, and seven preferred Self-Determined ( p = .80). The stretch was skipped 16% of the time using the Scheduled strategy and 6% with the Self-Determined strategy ( p = .18). Personal interest, improved mental focus, and ease of remembering were cited as the most influential factors for continued usage, while the most influential factor for not continuing was forgetting to use it. Self-determined intervals for intraoperative microbreaks represent a valid and potentially preferable implementation approach. Efforts to promote long-term adoption of microbreaks should focus on reminding surgeons to use them during operations.

This study provided additional evidence to support the OR-Stretch Web- App as a potential ergonomic intervention in the operating room. Overall, the ORStretch Web-App was beneficial to surgeons’ physical performance, mental focus, and discomfort. However, improving the Web-App to be user-friendly, and developing strategies to align the microbreaks with appropriate time spots during surgeries to not interrupt surgical workflow are among the key factors that need attention. Additionally, no significant differences in the surgeons’ subjective evaluation of the Break-30 and Break-60 scheduling strategies were found. However, the data and surgeons’ feedback implied that taking microbreaks every 30 min (Break-30 condition) may not be ideal, especially during long or complicated surgical procedures.