Ergonomic Analysis of Otologic Surgery: Comparison of Endoscope and Microscope.

OBJECTIVE: The comparative postural health of surgeons performing endoscopic and microscopic otologic surgeries has been a topic of active debate, with many nascent or anecdotal reports suggesting the latter encourages suboptimal ergonomics. Using inertial body sensors to measure joint angles, this study sought to objectively evaluate and compare the ergonomics of surgeons during endoscopic and microscopic otologic surgeries. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective pilot trial. SETTING: Large, multicenter, academic hospital system. Performed 21 otologic operations (10 endoscopic and 11 microscopic) in November 2020 and January 2021. All attendings were fellowship trained in otology/neurotology. SUBJECTS: Eight otolaryngologists (four attendings and four residents) performing 21 otologic surgeries (11 microscopic and 10 endoscopic). INTERVENTION: Approach to otologic surgery: endoscope or microscope. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgeons' neck and back angles while wearing ergonomic sensors affixed to either side of each major joint, mental and physical burdens and pain after each surgery (via modified NASA Task Load Index). RESULTS: Residents' necks (9.54° microscopic vs. -4.79° endoscopic, p = 0.04) and backs (16.48° microscopic vs. 3.66° endoscopic, p = 0.01) were significantly more flexed when performing microscopic surgery than when performing endoscopic surgery, although attending neck and back flexion were comparable during microscopic and endoscopic surgeries. Attendings reported significantly higher pain levels after operating microscopically than after operating endoscopically (0.13 vs. 2.76, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Residents were found to operate with significantly higher risk back and neck postures (as defined by the validated ergonomic tool, Rapid Entire Body Assessment) when operating microscopically. Attendings reported significantly higher levels of pain after operating microscopically versus endoscopically, suggesting that the suboptimal microscopic postures adopted earlier in training may pose an indelible risk later in a surgeon's career.

Ergonomic Analysis of Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery Using Novel Inertial Sensors.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Suboptimal ergonomics during endoscopic sinus surgery can lead to considerable physical discomfort and fatigue for the surgeon. The purpose of this pilot study is to objectively evaluate the ergonomic positions of trainee and attending surgeons while performing functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). STUDY DESIGN: Pilot prospective trial. METHODS: Six surgeons (two attendings and four trainees) performed FESS while wearing 11 inertial measurement units (IMUs) affixed to either side of each major joint. Screen placement was standardized to be 1 m directly in front of the surgeon and on the patient's left, 0-15° declined from the surgeons' eyes. Bed height was standardized such that the workspace was 0 to 10 cm below the elbows. IMU data were analyzed to calculate joint angles. Ideal joint angles (i.e., <10° for neck and trunk) were determined by the validated Rapid Entire Body Assessment tool. Subjects subsequently completed a modified National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index to assess cognitive and physical burden and pain. Student's t-test was employed to detect differences between groups. RESULTS: Trainees adopted positions involving significantly greater neck flexion (9.90° vs. -6.48°, P = .03) and reported significantly higher frustration levels (3.04 vs. 1.33, P = .02) while operating than attendings. For both cohorts, increased operative time was significantly correlated with greater back flexion (r = 0.90, P = .02; r = 0.55, P = .04, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that trainees operate with higher risk neck postures than do attendings. These data indicate high-risk operative postures may be borne of inexperience and present an opportunity for postural interventions at an early stage of training. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 132:1153-1159, 2022.