A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery at the operational level: an investigation of surgeons' perspectives. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Introduction: The Robotics Committee of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) conducted a study of surgeons' perspectives on robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) as compared to laparoscopic surgery (LS) in four domains: performance, requirements, challenges, and surgical care outcomes.

Methods: An exploratory sequential mixed-methods study was performed with a thematic analysis of surgeon interviews using the framework method, followed by an online survey of SAGES Robotics Committee members. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, and ANOVA were utilized for analysis.

Results: Seven robotic surgeons (3 female, 4 male) were interviewed. The primary themes were that RAS outperformed LS in (1) device performance, (2) intraoperative teaching, and (3) physical fatigue. Three perceived drawbacks of RAS compared to LS were(1) requiring more resources, (2) mechanical malfunction, and (3) care delivery cost. 55 of 92 surgeon committee members (59.8%) completed the survey. 50.9% (28/55) were male, 80% (44/55) practiced in an academic setting, and 70.9% (39/55) learned RAS during residency/fellowship training. Survey results were consistent with interview themes. Participants indicated that RAS improved performance and was associated with improved patient outcomes. They recognized the relative increased cost, the lack of tactile feedback, logistical challenges, and the increased demands of operative staff. 36.4% (20/55) surgeons ranked "AI-assisted navigation/guidance" as the "most wanted" new RAS function.

Conclusion: The findings from this study provide useful insights into surgeon perspectives related to RAS as it compares with laparoscopy and desired areas for new RAS developments that may be helpful to surgical organizations and industry partners alike.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-025-12152-yDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

laparoscopic surgery
8
surgeons' perspectives
8
robotics committee
8
ras
8
ras compared
8
committee members
8
robotic laparoscopic
4
surgery operational
4
operational level
4
level investigation
4

Similar Publications