Ergonomic risk assessment of surgeon's position during radical prostatectomy: Laparoscopic versus robotic approach

Background and ObjectivesRadical prostatectomy (RP) is a definitive surgical therapy for localized prostate cancer. Evidence suggests that the poor ergonomics of surgeons during RP may lead to work-related musculoskeletal disorders and loss of productivity. Since each surgery modality has its physical demands, we compared the ergonomic risk between laparoscopic (LRP) and robotic-assisted (RARP) radical prostatectomy. MethodsThe study assessed the posture of 10 urological surgeons during LRP and RARP surgeries with the Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) scale. ResultsWe found that the RARP approach resulted in lower REBA scores over the LRP procedure. ConclusionsRobotic surgery improves body posture for the urological surgeon like in other medical specialties. However, the surgeons display harmful postures in both surgeries.

Automated summary

This study compares the ergonomic risk between laparoscopic and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. The results show that the robotic-assisted approach has lower ergonomic risk compared to laparoscopic surgery. However, harmful postures are still observed in both surgeries.