Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Surg Endosc ; 17(2): 259-63, 2003 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12399835

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Doctors who perform minimally invasive surgery commonly report upper extremity fatigue or joint and muscle pain. The goal of this study was to investigate the changes in postural parameters associated with different laparoscopic training tasks and graspers. METHODS: Three different training tasks (targeted object release, rope passing, and cable tying) were performed with three types of laparoscopic graspers. Joint angles were determined using video analysis, and centers of pressure (COP) were measured with force platforms. RESULTS: Cable tying proved to be the most challenging training task and involved greater joint angle excursions and COP excursions and velocities. Grasper 2 reduced shoulder and wrist flexion-extension over the selected tasks. CONCLUSION: Training tasks should be designed to simulate surgical procedures because different tasks require distinct combinations of joint rotations. Joint rotations and postural balance should be considered when an optimal grasper is selected for a particular training task.


Subject(s)
Arthralgia/prevention & control , Laparoscopy/adverse effects , Laparoscopy/methods , Muscle Weakness/prevention & control , Posture/physiology , Preoperative Care/methods , Task Performance and Analysis , Analysis of Variance , Arthralgia/etiology , Exercise/physiology , Humans , Joints/physiopathology , Muscle Weakness/etiology , Pilot Projects
2.
Surg Endosc ; 17(3): 462-5, 2003 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12399872

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many surgeons report pain as a result of muscle fatigue during laparoscopy. Therefore, determining how surgical task or instrument selection influences the duration of muscle activation may provide insight into the relationship between laparoscopic instrumentation and muscle fatigue. METHODS: Surface electromyography (EMG) electrodes were placed over the right deltoid, trapezius, bicep, pronator teres, flexor carpi ulnaris, and extensor digitorum superficialis muscles of four surgeons. These surgeons were then asked to perform a targeted grasp and release (T1), a simulated bowel inspection (T2), and a cable-tying exercise (T3) while using three different inline finger-looped graspers. The graspers included a nonratcheted handle with a single-action blunt-end effector (G1) and two models that had ratcheted handles with dual-action end effectors (G2, G3). Resting and maximal voluntary contraction EMG values for each muscle were used to normalize the data and to determine percentage of activation during each task. A multivariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare EMG relative time of activation (RAT) patterns with grasper, task, and grasper and task interaction. RESULTS: In general, when grasper and task were considered individually, G1 and T3 demonstrated the highest RAT. Findings showed that RAT was most affected by the use of either G1 or G2 during T2 or T3. CONCLUSION: Task, grasper, and the interaction between grasper and task all appear to influence the RAT and therefore, to varying degrees, all three may play a role in influencing muscle fatigue.


Subject(s)
Laparoscopy , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/instrumentation , Muscle Fatigue/physiology , Muscle, Skeletal/physiology , Surgical Instruments , Adult , Arm , Cumulative Trauma Disorders/physiopathology , Electromyography , Equipment Design , Ergonomics , Female , Humans , Isometric Contraction/physiology , Laparoscopes , Male , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Multivariate Analysis , Muscle Contraction/physiology , Pilot Projects , Task Performance and Analysis
3.
Semin Laparosc Surg ; 8(1): 42-52, 2001 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-11337736

ABSTRACT

The authors provide an overview of laparoscopic dissecting instruments and discuss early development, surgical options, and special features. End effectors of different shapes and functions are described. A comparison of available energy sources for laparoscopic instruments includes discussion of thermal dissection, ultrasonic dissection, and water-jet dissection. The ergonomic risks and challenges inherent in the use of current laparoscopic instruments are outlined, as well as ergonomic issues for the design of future instruments. New directions that laparoscopic instrumentation may take are considered in connection with developing technology in robotics, haptic feedback, and MicroElectroMechanical Systems.


Subject(s)
Dissection/instrumentation , Laparoscopy , Dissection/methods , Equipment Design , Ergonomics , Humans , Ultrasonics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...