Advertisement

International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 30, Issue 2, pp 231–237 | Cite as

Sitting versus standing makes a difference in musculoskeletal discomfort and postural load for surgeons performing vaginal surgery

  • Ruchira SinghEmail author
  • Ladin A. Yurteri-Kaplan
  • Melissa M. Morrow
  • Amy L. Weaver
  • Michaela E. McGree
  • Xinhui Zhu
  • Victor L. Paquet
  • John B. Gebhart
  • Susan Hallbeck
Original Article

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

We compared musculoskeletal discomfort and postural load among surgeons in sitting and standing positions during vaginal surgery.

Materials and methods

Assessment of discomfort and posture of the primary surgeons in both positions was performed at two institutions. The primary outcome was an increase in body discomfort score after surgery as determined from subjective responses using validated tools. The secondary outcome was the percentage of time spent in awkward body postures measured objectively and stratified into awkward postures for neck, trunk, and bilateral shoulder angles. Variables were compared between sitting and standing positions using Fisher’s exact test for primary outcomes and Wilcoxon rank-sum test for secondary outcomes.

Results

Data were collected for 24 surgeries from four surgeons in sitting position and nine surgeries from nine surgeons in standing position. The standing surgeons reported a significant increase in discomfort postoperatively for bilateral wrists, thighs, and lower legs compared with the sitting surgeons. The median percentage of time spent in awkward postures was significantly lower for the trunk in the standing versus sitting position (median 0.3% vs 58.8%, p < 0.001) but was significantly higher for both shoulders in the standing versus the sitting position (right shoulder: median 17.8% vs 0.3%, p = 0.003; left shoulder: median 7.4% vs 0.2%, p = 0.003).

Conclusion

Surgeons reported more discomfort in when performing vaginal surgery while standing. The postural load was worse for trunk but favorable for bilateral shoulders when seated. Such differences may impact a surgeon’s decision to perform vaginal surgery seated rather than standing.

Keywords

Ergonomics Vaginal surgery Musculoskeletal discomfort Postural load 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

Ruchira Singh: None.

Ladin A. Yurteri-Kaplan: None.

Melissa M. Morrow: None.

Michaela E. McGree: None.

Amy L. Weaver: None.

Xinhui Zhu: None.

Victor L. Paquet: None.

John B. Gebhart: Royalties - UpToDate and Elsevier.

Susan Hallbeck: None.

Paper presentation

Accepted for oral poster presentation at the 43rd Annual Scientific Meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons, 26–29 March 2017, San Antonio, TX, USA.

Disclaimer

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Bourne SK, Walcott BP, Sheth SA, Coumans JCE. Neurological surgery: the influence of physical and mental demands on humans performing complex operations. J Clin Neurosci. 2013;  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2012.09.008.
  2. 2.
    Reyes D, Tang B, Cuschieri A. Minimal access surgery (MAS)-related surgeon morbidity syndromes. Surg Endosc. 2006;20(1):1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Waters TR, Dick RB. Evidence of health risks associated with prolonged standing at work and intervention effectiveness. Rehabil Nurs. 2015;  https://doi.org/10.1002/rnj.166.
  4. 4.
    Voss RK, Chiang YJ, Cromwell KD, Urbauer DL, Lee JE, Cormier JN, et al. Do no harm, except to ourselves? A survey of symptoms and injuries in oncologic surgeons and pilot study of an intraoperative ergonomic intervention. J Am Coll Surg. 2017;224(1):16–25.e1.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.09.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Park A, Lee G, Seagull FJ, Meenaghan N, Dexter D. Patients benefit while surgeons suffer: an impending epidemic. J am Coll Surg. 2010;  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.10.017.
  6. 6.
    Tarr ME, Brancato SJ, Cunkelman JA, Polcari A, Nutter B, Kenton K. Comparison of postural ergonomics between laparoscopic and robotic sacrocolpopexy: a pilot study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015;  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2014.10.004.
  7. 7.
    Craven R, Franasiak J, Mosaly P, Gehrig PA. Ergonomic deficits in robotic gynecologic oncology surgery: a need for intervention. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013;  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2013.04.008.
  8. 8.
    Dolan LM, Martin DH. Backache in gynaecologists. Occup Med (Lond). 2001;51(7):433–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Franasiak J, Ko EM, Kidd J, Secord AA, Bell M, Boggess JF, et al. Physical strain and urgent need for ergonomic training among gynecologic oncologists who perform minimally invasive surgery. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.05.016.
  10. 10.
    Singh R, Carranza Leon DA, Morrow MM, Vos-Draper TL, Mc Gree ME, Weaver AL, et al. Effect of chair types on work-related musculoskeletal discomfort during vaginal surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(5):648.e1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2016.06.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kim-Fine S, Woolley SM, Weaver AL, Killian JM, Gebhart JB. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders among vaginal surgeons. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1958-x.
  12. 12.
    Yoong W, Sanchez-Crespo J, Rob J, Parikh M, Melendez J, Pillai R, et al. Sticks and stones may break my bones: work-related orthopaedic injuries sustained during obstetrics and gynaecology training. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2008;  https://doi.org/10.1080/01443610802091396.
  13. 13.
    Zhu X, Yurteri-Kaplan L, Gutman RE, Sokol AI, Iglesia CB, Park AJ, et al. Postural stress experienced by vaginal surgeons. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet. 2014;58(1):763–7.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931214581139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaires [Internet]. Human Factors and Ergonomics Laboratory, Cornell University. Available at: http://ergo.human.cornell.edu/ahmsquest.html. Accessed Sept 15th 2017.
  15. 15.
    Kuorinka I, Jonsson B, Kilbom A, Vinterberg H, Biering-Sørensen F, Andersson G, et al. Standardised Nordic questionnaires for the analysis of musculoskeletal symptoms. Appl Ergon. 1987;18(3):233–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Morrow MM, Lowndes B, Fortune E, Kaufman KR, Hallbeck S. Validation of inertial measurement units for upper body kinematics. J Appl Biomech. 2017;33(3):227–32.  https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.2016-0120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Borg G. Champaign, IL, US: Human Kinetics (1998). Borg's perceived exertion and pain scales. Hum Kinet 8 (1998): 104.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhu X, Yurteri-Kaplan LA, Cavuoto LA, Sokol AI, Iglesia CB, Gutman RE, et al. ErgoPART: A Computerized Observational Tool to Quantify Postural Loading in Real-Time During Surgery. IISE Trans Occup Ergon Hum Factors. 2017;5(1):23–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Keyserling WM, Brouwer M, Silverstein BA. A checklist for evaluating ergonomic risk factors resulting from awkward postures of the legs, trunk and neck. Int J Ind Ergon. 1992;9(4):283–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Buchholz B, Paquet V. Reducing ergonomic hazards during highway construction: a case study of a tunnel ceiling panel assembly operation. Ergonomics in health care and rehabilitation. Newton: Butterworth-Heinemann; 1998.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bernard BP, Putz-Anderson V. Musculoskeletal disorders and workplace factors; a critical review of epidemiologic evidence for work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the neck, upper extremity, and low back." (1997). Available at https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/21745. Accessed Sept 15th 2017.
  22. 22.
    Chester MR, Rys MJ, Konz SA. Leg swelling, comfort and fatigue when sitting, standing, and sit/standing. Int J Ind Ergon. 2002;  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-8141(01)00069-5.
  23. 23.
    Bridger RS, Orkin D, Henneberg M. A quantitative investigation of lumbar and pelvic postures in standing and sitting: interrelationships with body position and hip muscle length. Int J Ind Ergon. 1992;  https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-8141(92)90017-T.
  24. 24.
    Drury CG, Hsiao YL, Joseph C, Joshi S, Lapp J, Pennathur PR. Posture and performance: sitting vs. standing for security screening. Ergonomics. 2008;  https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130701628790.
  25. 25.
    Tissot F, Messing K, Stock S. Studying the relationship between low back pain and working postures among those who stand and those who sit most of the working day. Ergonomics. 2009;  https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130903141204.
  26. 26.
    Grandjean E, Hünting W. Ergonomics of posture—review of various problems of standing and sitting posture. Appl Ergon. 1977;  https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(77)90002-3.
  27. 27.
    Corlett EN, Manenica I. The effects and measurement of working postures. Appl Ergon. 1980;  https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(80)90115-5.
  28. 28.
    Yu D, Dural C, Melissa M, Morrow B, Yang L, Collins JW, et al. Intraoperative workload in robotic surgery assessed by wearable motion tracking sensors and questionnaires. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(2):877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hallbeck MS, Lowndes BR, Bingener J, Abdelrahman AM, Yu D, Bartley A, et al. The impact of intraoperative microbreaks with exercises on surgeons: A multi-center cohort study. Appl Ergon. 2017;60:334–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Park AE, Zahiri HR, Hallbeck MS, Augenstein V, Sutton E, Yu D, et al. Intraoperative “micro breaks” with targeted stretching enhance surgeon physical function and mental focus: a multicenter cohort study. Ann Surg. 2016;  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001665.

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ruchira Singh
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ladin A. Yurteri-Kaplan
    • 2
  • Melissa M. Morrow
    • 3
    • 4
  • Amy L. Weaver
    • 3
  • Michaela E. McGree
    • 3
  • Xinhui Zhu
    • 5
  • Victor L. Paquet
    • 6
  • John B. Gebhart
    • 7
  • Susan Hallbeck
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyUniversity of FloridaJacksonvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyColumbia University New York PresbyterianNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.Department of Health Sciences ResearchMayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  4. 4.Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care DeliveryMayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  5. 5.School of Mechanical, Industrial, and Manufacturing EngineeringOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA
  6. 6.Department of Industrial and Systems EngineeringUniversity at Buffalo, The State University of New YorkBuffaloUSA
  7. 7.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyMayo ClinicRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations