Monitor position in laparoscopic surgery

BackgroundOne of the key problems in laparoscopy is the ergonomic positioning of the monitor. In this study we tested task performance and muscle strain of subjects in relation to monitor position during laparoscopic surgery.MethodsEighteen subjects simulated laparoscopic suturing by threading tiny pearls with a curved needle. This was repeated in three monitor positions (15 min each): frontal at eye level (A), frontal in height of the operating field (B), and 45° to the right side at eye level (C). Subjects were not allowed to turn their heads during these sessions. After the test they were asked for their preferred monitor position. During all tests the electromyographic (EMG) activity of the main neck muscles was recorded and the number of pearls was counted.ResultsThe EMG activity was significantly lower for position A compared to positions C and B (p < 0.05). No significant difference was found between positions B and C. The number of threaded pearls as an indicator for task performance was highest for position B. The difference was statistically significant compared to position C (p = 0.0008) but not between positions A and C (p = 0.0508) or A and B (p = 0.0575). When asked for the preferred monitor position, nine subjects chose two monitors in the frontal positions A and B. No subject preferred the monitor at the side position (C).ConclusionRegarding EMG data, the monitor positioned frontal at eye level is preferable. Reflecting personal preferences of subjects and task performance, it should be of advantage to place two monitors in front of the surgeon: one in position A for lowest neck strain and the other in position B for difficult tasks with optimal task performance. The monitor position at the side is not advisable.

[1]  M. Mueller,et al.  Three-dimensional laparoscopy , 1999, Surgical Endoscopy.

[2]  A. Cuschieri,et al.  Optimal port locations for endoscopic intracorporeal knotting , 1997, Surgical Endoscop.

[3]  A. Cuschieri,et al.  Influence of direction of view, target‐to‐endoscope distance and manipulation angle on endoscopic knot tying , 1997, The British journal of surgery.

[4]  A. Cuschieri,et al.  Task performance in endoscopic surgery is influenced by location of the image display. , 1998, Annals of surgery.

[5]  E. N. Corlett,et al.  Evaluation of human work : a practical ergonomics methodology , 1991 .

[6]  P. Faul Video TUR: raising the gold standard. New aspects, techniques and tendencies to minimize invasiveness. , 1993, European urology.

[7]  A. Luttmann,et al.  Muscular Strain and Fatigue among Urologists during Transurethral Resections Using Direct and Monitor Endoscopy , 1998, European Urology.

[8]  Lawrence W. Stark,et al.  Sensing and Manipulation Problems in Endoscopic Surgery: Experiment, Analysis, and Observation , 1993, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[9]  K. Harms-Ringdahl,et al.  Neck and shoulder muscle activity during work with different cash register systems. , 1990, Ergonomics.

[10]  D. Meijer,et al.  Evaluation of the usability of two types of image display systems, during laparoscopy , 2001, Surgical Endoscopy.

[11]  Die Erholung nach statischer Haltearbeit , 1934, Arbeitsphysiologie.

[12]  A Aarås,et al.  Postural load during VDU work: a comparison between various work postures. , 1997, Ergonomics.