Physical and psychological impact of surgery on the operating surgeon.

The impact of surgery on the surgeon's well-being encompasses both physical and psychological aspects. Physically, surgeons are at risk of work-related musculoskeletal symptoms due to the nature of their work, and this risk can be impacted by theater environment, equipment design, and workload. Many symptoms will be self-limiting, but work related musculoskeletal symptoms can lead to the development of an injury, which can have far reaching effects, including the need for medical or surgical treatment, time away from work, or a change in clinical duties. Additionally, surgery can place a significant cognitive workload on the lead operator and this can be exacerbated, or alleviated, by the surgical environment, experience of the assistance, surgical modality, and case complexity. Measuring and quantifying the impact of surgery on the surgeon is a challenging undertaking. Tools such as motion capture, physiological markers, including heart rate variability and salivary cortisol, and questionnaires can provide insights into understanding the overall impact of surgery on the surgeon. A holistic approach that incorporates injury prevention strategies, communication, and support, is vital in assessing and mitigating risk factors. Injury prevention assessment tools and interventions that can be used within the busy surgical environment are needed, alongside increased ergonomic awareness. Addressing the impact of surgery on the surgeon is a multifaceted challenge, and long term positive changes can only be sustained with the support of the whole surgical team and healthcare organizations by developing and maintaining a supportive working environment.

Cognitive Functional Therapy compared with usual physiotherapy care in people with persistent low back pain: a mixed methods feasibility randomised controlled trial in the United Kingdom National Health Service.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility of completing a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT), evaluating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of Cognitive Functional Therapy (CFT) in comparison to usual physiotherapy care (UPC), for people with persistent low back pain (LBP). DESIGN AND SETTING: A two-arm parallel feasibility RCT completed in a United Kingdom (UK) Secondary Care National Health Service (NHS) physiotherapy service. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty adult participants who reported LBP lasting for more than three months, that was not attributable to a serious (e.g. cancer) or specific (e.g. radiculopathy) underlying cause, were invited to participate. Participants were allocated at random to receive CFT or UPC. INTERVENTIONS: Cognitive Functional Therapy and Usual Physiotherapy Care for persistent LBP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the feasibility of completing a definitive RCT, defined by recruitment of at least 5 participants per month, delivery of CFT per protocol and securing relevant and acceptable outcome measures. Data concerning study processes, resources, management and participant reported outcome measures were collected at baseline, 3, 6 and 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Sixty participants (n = 30 CFT and n = 30 UPC) were recruited with 80% (n = 48), 72% (n = 43) and 53% (n = 32) retained at 3, 6 and 12-month follow-up respectively. NHS physiotherapists were trained to competence and delivered CFT with fidelity. CFT was tolerated by participants with no adverse events. Relevant and clinically important outcome data were collected at all time points (0.4%, 3%, 1% and 0.8% of data was missing from the returned outcome measure booklets at baseline and 3, 6 and 12-month follow-up respectively). The Roland-Morris disability questionnaire was considered the most suitable primary outcome measure with a proposed sample size of 540 participants for a definitive cluster RCT. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to conduct a randomised study of CFT in comparison to UPC for NHS patients. A future study should incorporate an internal pilot to address aspects of feasibility further, including participant retention strategies. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN12965286 CONTRIBUTION OF THE PAPER.