Article

New ergonomic design criteria for handles of laparoscopic dissection forceps.

Faculty of Design, Engineering and Production, Subfaculty Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques (Impact Factor: 1.07). 03/2001; 11(1):17-26. DOI: 10.1089/10926420150502896
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The shape of laparoscopic instrument handles can cause physical discomfort. This problem may be ascribed to a lack of standards for instrument design. In this study, new ergonomic requirements for the design of laparoscopic dissection forceps were created. Three representative handles (a Karl Storz [click-line] scissors handle, an Access Plus scissors handle, and an Aesculap cylindrical handle) currently available on the market were evaluated according to the new list of ergonomic criteria.
The handles were subjectively (questionnaire) and objectively (video analyses) tested in order to find out whether the new requirements are valid for the evaluation and design of instrument handles.
The outcome of the subjective and objective tests matched the predictions by the new criteria list. New criteria were introduced (neutral wrist excursions), and existing general criteria were specified (e.g., a minimal contact area of 10 mm). Significant differences were found among the three handles. The Storz handle met 8 of the 10 requirements, the Access handle met 5, and the Aesculap handle met only 4.
The new list of ergonomic requirements is a valid tool to determine the ergonomic value of a handle for laparoscopic dissecting tasks. It gains its strength from its specialized character. Significant differences were found among the three tested handles. Cylindrical handles were inferior to scissors handles.

1 Bookmark
 · 
90 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine whether laparoscopic skills performance is affected by instrument design. Randomized crossover study. Veterinarians (n = 14) with variable laparoscopic experience. Laparoscopic skills performance was assessed with the McGill Inanimate System for Training and Evaluation of Laparoscopic Skills (MISTELS). Participants performed 3 MISTELS tasks twice during 2 sessions (4 tests total). Each set of instruments (set A, B) was used once during each session, and instrument order was switched between the first and second sessions. Surgeons were randomly allocated to either the AB-BA or the BA-AB sequence in a balanced fashion. Scores were compared between instrument sets A and B. Overall, participants performed better when using set A compared with set B. This difference was most striking in the pattern-cutting task (which used scissors and graspers), less convincing in the peg transfer task (which used 2 graspers), and nonexistent in the ligature loop task (which used 1 grasper and 1 pretied ligature loop). Laparoscopic skills performance, as assessed by MISTELS testing, is affected by instrument design.
    Veterinary Surgery 11/2012; 41(8):988-93. · 1.24 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: : The first aim of this study is to analyze the muscle activity in back and forearm muscles in surgeons during laparoscopic dissection and suturing maneuvers. The second aim is to determine the influence of the surgeons' previous experience in laparoscopic surgery. : A total of 30 laparoscopic surgeons were divided in 3 groups: novice suturing, novice dissecting, and experts suturing. Electromyography data were collected from the trapezius, forearm flexors, and forearm extensors muscles, during the proposed tasks on physical simulator. : Muscle activity was significantly lower in the expert group. Moreover, muscle activity in the trapezius was significantly higher during the completion of intracorporeal suturing when compared with that during dissection. : Results obtained in this study show that the surgeons with a higher degree of laparoscopic experience exhibit a lower level of muscle activity when compared with the novice surgeons. Moreover, in accordance to our results, laparoscopic suturing involves a higher degree of muscle effort than during laparoscopic dissection.
    Surgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques 04/2013; 23(2):203-7. · 0.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The prolonged and frequent use of laparoscopic equipment raises ergonomic risks that may cause physical distress for surgeons. We aimed to assess the prevalence of urologic surgeons' physical distress associated with ergonomic problems in the operating room (OR) and their awareness of the ergonomic guidelines in China. A sample of 300 laparoscopic urologists in China was assessed using a questionnaire on demographic information, ergonomic issues in the OR, musculoskeletal symptoms, and awareness of the ergonomic guidelines for the OR. There were 241 survey respondents (86.7%) with valid questionnaires. Among the respondents, only 43.6% placed the operating table at pubic height during the actual operation. The majority of the respondents (63.5%) used only one monitor during the procedure. Only 29.9% placed the monitor below the eye level. More than half of the respondents (50.6%) preferred to use manual control instead of the foot pedal. Most of the respondents (95.0%) never used the body support. The respondents experienced discomfort in the following regions, in ascending order: leg (21.6%), hand (30.3%), wrist (32.8%), shoulder (33.6%), back (53.1%), and neck (58.1%). The respondents with over 250 total operations experienced less discomfort than those with less than 250 total operations. Most of the respondents (84.6%) were unaware of the ergonomic guidelines. However, almost all of the respondents (98.3%) regarded the ergonomic guidelines to be important in the OR. Most of the laparoscopic urologists were not aware of the ergonomic guidelines for the OR; hence, they have been suffering from varying degrees of physical discomfort caused by ergonomic issues. There is an urgent need for education regarding ergonomic guidelines in the OR for laparoscopic urologists in China.
    PLoS ONE 01/2013; 8(7):e70423. · 3.73 Impact Factor