Smith, Tianqi Gao

Abstract Background This study compared the ergonomics of surgeons during deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap surgery using either baseline equipment (loupes, headlights, and an operating microscope) or an exoscope. Plastic surgeons may be at high risk of musculoskeletal problems. Recent studies indicate that adopting an exoscope may significantly improve surgeon postures and ergonomics. Methods Postural exposures, using inertial measurement units at the neck, torso, and shoulders, were calculated in addition to the surgeons' subjective physical and cognitive workload. An ergonomic risk score on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 4 (highest) was calculated for each of the postures observed. Data from 23 bilateral DIEP flap surgeries (10 baseline and 13 exoscope) were collected. Results The neck and torso risk scores decreased significantly during abdominal flap harvest and chest dissection, while right shoulder risk scores increased during the abdominal flap harvest for exoscope DIEP flap procedures compared with. Exoscope anastomoses demonstrated higher neck, right shoulder, and left shoulder risk scores. The results from the survey for the “surgeon at abdomen” showed that the usage of exoscopes was associated with decreased performance and increased mental demand, temporal demand, and effort. However, the results from the “surgeon at chest” showed that the usage of exoscopes was associated with lower physical demand and fatigue, potentially due to differences in surgeon preference. Conclusion Our study revealed some objective evidence for the ergonomic benefits of exoscope; however, this is dependent on the tasks the surgeon is performing. Additionally, personal preferences may be an important factor to be considered in the ergonomic evaluation of the exoscope.

Musculoskeletal disorders and intraoperative pain are prevalent among vascular surgeons which can negatively affect their surgical performance and quality of life. The effectiveness of a lower back support exoskeleton to reduce discomfort of the back, subjective fatigue, and the workload associated with performing vascular surgery was evaluated, as well as the participants’ intraoperative upper body postures. Three vascular surgeons were asked to rate their discomfort and fatigue before, during and after performing surgery, and their subjective workload post-operatively. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) were used to measure their intraoperative body postures. No significant differences were found between exoskeleton and baseline discomfort, fatigue, workload, or intraoperative postures. This indicates that although the exoskeleton did not restrict the vascular surgeons’ postures, this exoskeleton was ineffective at reducing their discomfort or workload. Future studies with exoskeletons specifically designed for healthcare applications may show more efficacy in reducing the ergonomic risks to surgeons.

The main goal of this pilot study was to create, implement and evaluate a strategy for introducing exoskeletons in the operating room (OR) at a quaternary care academic hospital. The strategy consisted of operating-room-specific considerations, introducing exoskeletons to surgeons, and a post-surgery survey. Three male attending vascular surgeons participated in eleven data collections to date. Low interference with surgeon’s ability to perform surgery was found for all surgical procedures, except for two open abdominal aortic procedures. The surgeons reported little to no limit on range of motion, except for one open abdominal aortic procedure. Lower than expected perceived improvement of ability to perform surgery and increase of physical comfort was self-reported. The responses indicate that the surgeons are willing to keep trying an exoskeleton intervention. In conclusion, a feasible process was created to introduce passive exoskeleton as an ergonomic intervention to vascular surgeons in their ORs.