An interdisciplinary team-training protocol for robotic gynecologic surgery improves operating time and costs: analysis of a 4-year experience in a university hospital setting

Robotic approach to colonic resection: For some or for all patients?

The robotic approach is rapidly gaining momentum in colorectal surgery. Its benefits in pelvic surgery have been extensively discussed and are well established amongst those who perform minimally invasive surgery. However, the same cannot be said for the robotic approach for colonic resection, where its role is still debated. Here we aim to provide an extensive debate between selective and absolute use of the robotic approach for colonic resection by combining the thoughts of experts in the field of robotic and minimally invasive colorectal surgery, dissecting all key aspects for a critical view on this exciting new paradigm in colorectal surgery.

How does robotic surgery affect gynecology patient care?

The aim of this review is to map the current research on the needs of gynecological patients treated with robotic surgery. Systematic Rapid Review. Pubmed, Web of Science, Google Scholar. Search was limited from the years 2017-2021. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement was followed. Rapid review is a synthesis of information produced in a shorter time than systematic reviews, which allows clinical nurses to access evidence in the decision-making process. The methodological steps implemented were the following: (1) needs assessment and topic selection, (2) study development, (3) literature search, (4) screening and study selection, (5) data extraction, (6) risk-of-bias assessment and (7) knowledge synthesis. The search yielded 815 articles, 746 were excluded after screening the title and abstract, and 69 full-text syntheses were performed. Only 10 articles were included in the final analysis. This research evaluated the effects of robotic surgery on the patient under seven themes; operative time, length of stay, complications, estimated blood loss, pain, survivor, and conversion. Five studies were on endometrial cancer, one study on gynecologic cancer, two studies on hysterectomy, one study on patient safety, and one study on cervical cancer. The results show that robotic surgery can change the needs of patients by solving ongoing problems in gynecological patients. This requires a better understanding of robotic surgery procedures while facilitating nursing care over patient care.

Robotic Surgery for Severe Endometriosis: A Preliminary Comparative Study of Cost Estimation

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare the postoperative outcomes and the overall expenses between conventional laparoscopy and robotic surgery, in a series of consecutive patients managed for only severe endometriosis in our institute.

DESIGN

A cohort comparative study.

SETTING

Center of Excellence in Multidisciplinary Endometriosis Care.

PATIENTS

A total of 175 symptomatic patients undergoing surgery for only severe endometriosis from March 2021 to August 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

We treated patients with endometriosis involving the digestive tract such as rectum, sigmoid colon, and ileocecal junction by rectal shaving, discoid resection, or segmental resection (141 surgeries) with or without bladder (23 surgeries), sacral plexus (19 surgeries), and diaphragm involvements (14 surgeries).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Postoperative outcomes were evaluated in terms of total surgical time (total surgical room occupancy time and total operating time), hospitalization period, postoperative complications, rehospitalization, and second surgical procedures. A statistically higher total surgical room occupancy (203 minutes vs 151 minutes) and operating time (150 minutes vs 105 minutes) were observed in the robotic group (p = .001). No differences in terms of mean hospital stay (p = .06), postoperative complications (p = .91), rehospitalization (p = .48), and secondary surgical treatment (p = .78) were identified. Concerning the cost analysis only for disposable supply, the cost of colorectal resection was totaled at 2604 euros for the laparoscopic conventional approach vs 2957 euros for the robotic approach (+352.6 euros, +14%). The cost of rectal disc excision was 1527 euros for the laparoscopic conventional approach vs 1905.85 euros (+378 euros, +25%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirms the feasibility of the robotic approach for the treatment of severe endometriosis, with however a higher cost of robotic approach. Next studies should identify specific indications for robotic surgery, where technical advantages provided by the technology are followed by objective improvement of patients' outcomes.

What do nurses experience in communication when assisting in robotic surgery: an integrative literature review

BACKGROUND

Communication in surgery is integral to the fundamentals of perioperative nursing practice and patient safety. Research exploring team communication in robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is evident in the literature but little attention has been focused on how the experiences of operating room nurses' communication affect safety, practice and patient care outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise current evidence regarding communication during robotic-assisted surgery as experienced by registered nurses.

DESIGN

An integrative literature review informed by Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) methodology was used to conduct a rigorous analysis and synthesis of evidence.

METHODS

A comprehensive database search was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. CINAHL, Pubmed, PsychINFO and British Nursing Web of Science databases were searched using a Boolean strategy.

RESULTS

Twenty-five relevant papers were included in this literature review. Thematic analysis revealed two main themes with four related subthemes. The two main themes are: 'Adaptive operating room nursing in RAS' and 'RAS alters team dynamics'. The four subthemes are: 'Navigating disruptions in RAS', 'RAS heightens interdependence on team working', 'Augmented communicative workflow in RAS', and 'Professional empowerment to speak up'.

CONCLUSIONS

This integrative review identifies how current research largely focuses on communication in the wider OR team. However, current evidence lacks the input of nurses. Therefore, further evidence is needed to explore nurses' experiences to highlight their perspectives.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Robotics significantly benefit patients, and this review identifies different challenges that robotic-assisted surgery nurses encounter. A better understanding of the communication from the perspective of nurses is needed to guide future research, practice education, policy development and leadership/management.

Nurses' perceptions and experiences of robotic assisted surgery (RAS): An integrative review

AIM

To identify and review published literature on the perceptions and experience of nurses working with RAS.

BACKGROUND

Robotic assisted surgery (RAS) is rapidly becoming accepted as the elite modality for surgery since its introduction in the 1980 s, more recently there has been a rising trend of use with several specialities operating using this technology. The role of nurses in perioperative care has been described as maintaining the momentum of the patient's journey. Patients undergoing RAS require nursing care throughout their journey, therefore knowledge of nurses' experiences and perceptions of RAS is important to identifying nurse education and development needs.

DESIGN

Integrative literature review DATABASE SOURCES: Databases searched for peer reviewed studies included CINAHL, Academic Search Complete, EMBASE, Scopus, ADA Psycinfo, Medline.

REVIEW METHODS

A comprehensive database search was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Six databases were searched with 523 screened for eligibility. Ten studies were included in the review seven qualitative and three quantitative.

RESULTS

Ten studies were identified, critically appraised and synthesised using thematic analysis. All studies were conducted with nurses in the perioperative environment. Key findings were that nurses education regarding RAS is limited with more emphasis placed on surgeon education and training. There was evidence that nurses experienced a lack of education, training and information as barriers to their role which subsequently raised their stress levels.

CONCLUSION

Evidence suggests a clear need for education and training for nurses working with RAS. In addition, nurses working with RAS provide care preoperatively, intraoperatively, postoperatively and post discharge in the community. However, no research has been conducted with nurses outside of the perioperative environment. Further research is required to understand the experiences and perceptions of nurses working with RAS patients in all care settings to identify their education and development needs.

Identifying Workflow Disruptions in Robotic-Assisted Bariatric Surgery: Elucidating Challenges Experienced by Surgical Teams

PURPOSE

Bariatric surgery is an effective and durable treatment for weight loss for patients with extreme obesity. Although traditionally approached laparoscopically, robotic bariatric surgery (RBS) has unique benefits for both surgeons and patients. Nonetheless, the technological complexity of robotic surgery presents new challenges for OR teams and the wider clinical system. Further assessment of the role of RBS in delivering quality care for patients with obesity is necessary and can be done through a human factors approach. This observational study sought to investigate the impact of RBS on the surgical work system via the study of flow disruptions (FDs), or deviations from the natural workflow progression.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

RBS procedures were observed between October 2019 and March 2022. FDs were recorded in real time and subsequently classified into one of nine work system categories. Coordination FDs were further classified into additional sub-categories.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine RBS procedures were observed at three sites. An average FD rate of 25.05 (CI =  ± 2.77) was observed overall. FDs were highest between insufflation and robot docking (M = 29.37, CI =  ± 4.01) and between patient closing and wheels out (M = 30.00, CI =  ± 6.03). FD rates due to coordination issues were highest overall, occurring once every 4 min during docking (M = 14.28, CI =  ± 3.11).

CONCLUSION

FDs occur roughly once every 2.4 min and happen most frequently during the final patient transfer and robot docking phases of RBS. Coordination challenges associated with waiting for staff/instruments not readily available and readjusting equipment contributed most to these disruptions.

ROBOTIC-ASSISTED VERSUS LAPAROSCOPIC INCISIONAL HERNIA REPAIR: DIFFERENCES IN DIRECT COSTS FROM A BRAZILIAN PUBLIC INSTITUTE PERSPECTIVE

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted surgery research has grown dramatically in the past two decades and the advantages over traditional videolaparoscopy have been extensively debated. For hernias, the robotic system can increase intraoperative strategies, especially in complex hernias or incisional hernias.

AIMS

This study aimed to compare the direct cost differences between robotic and laparoscopic hernia repair and determine each source of expenditure that may be related to the increased costs in a robotic program from the perspective of a Brazilian public institution.

METHODS

This study investigated the differences in direct costs from the data generated from a trial protocol (ReBEC: RBR-5s6mnrf). Patients with incisional hernia were randomly assigned to receive laparoscopic ventral incisional hernia repair (LVIHR) or robotic ventral incisional hernia repair (RVIHR). The direct medical costs of hernia treatment were described in the Brazilian currency (R$).

RESULTS

A total of 19 patients submitted to LVIHR were compared with 18 submitted to RVIHR. The amount spent on operation room time (RVIHR: 2,447.91±644.79; LVIHR: 1,989.67±763.00; p=0.030), inhaled medical gases in operating room (RVIHR: 270.57±211.51; LVIHR: 84.55±252.34; p=0.023), human resources in operating room (RVIHR: 3,164.43±894.97; LVIHR: 2,120.16±663.78; p<0.001), material resources (RVIHR: 3,204.32±351.55; LVIHR: 736.51±972.32; p<0.001), and medications (RVIHR: 823.40±175.47; LVIHR: 288.50±352.55; p<0.001) for RVIHR was higher than that for LVIHR, implying a higher total cost to RVIHR (RVIHR: 14,712.24±3,520.82; LVIHR: 10,295.95±3,453.59; p<0.001). No significant difference was noted in costs related to the hospital stay, human resources in intensive care unit and ward, diagnostic tests, and meshes.

CONCLUSION

Robotic system adds a significant overall cost to traditional laparoscopic hernia repair. The cost of the medical and robotic devices and longer operative times are the main factors driving the difference in costs.

The role of the bedside assistant in robot-assisted surgery: A critical synthesis

INTRODUCTION

Robot-assisted surgery has grown exponentially since its inception and first approval in the United States in the year 2000. The surgeon operating with the assistance of the robot sits remotely to the patient and another practitioner assists at the bedside. The role of the bedside assistant and the training that is required to undertake this role are understudied topics.

AIM

To explore the functions, training and professional development of the bedside assistant in robot-assisted surgery and propose the necessary foundations for the safe enactment of the role in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

Through critical interpretative synthesis, relevant literature was systematically searched and analysed to inform integration of evidence.

RESULTS

Seventy-three studies were retrieved from the literature, across several health care disciplines and surgical specialities. These were critically analysed to inform a theoretically sound account grounded on evidence.

CONCLUSION

The role, functions and skills of the bedside assistant in robot-assisted surgery vary across contexts. These were analysed and critically synthetised to produce several keys to the success of bedside assistants in robot-assisted surgery in the context of the United Kingdom and of its national regulations.