The distribution of robotic surgery in general and visceral surgery departments in Switzerland - a nationwide inquiry.

Objectives: Since its introduction as a clinical technique, robotic surgery has been extended to different fields of surgery. However, the indications as well as the number of robotic procedures varied in different institutions. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the current use of robotic surgery in general and digestive surgery in Switzerland. Methods: All Swiss surgical departments that are recognized training institutes for postgraduate training in surgery by the Swiss Institute of Medical Education (SIWF) were queried with a detailed questionnaire regarding the use of robotic surgery techniques and were analyzed regarding hospital size and type of hospital. Results: Ninety-three departments were queried, and 67 % (n=63) answered the survey. Fifty-eight were public, and five were private institutions. Seventeen (26 %) of the queried departments used robotic surgery in digestive surgery. Four out of 17 (23 %) of the departments that performed robotic surgery were private hospitals, while 13 (77 %) were public institutions. In the majority of departments, robotic surgery of the rectum (n=12; 70.6 %) and colon (n=11; 64.7 %) was performed, followed by hernia procedures (n=8; 47.1 %) and fundoplication (n=7; 41.2 %). Less frequently, pancreatic resections (n=5; 29.4 %), cholecystectomy (n=4; 23.5 %), adrenalectomy (n=4; 23.5 %), gastric bypass (n=3; 17.7 %), gastric sleeve (n=3; 17.7 %), hepatic procedures (n=2; 11.7 %), or small bowel resections (n=1; 5.9 %) were performed as robotic procedures. More than 25 procedures per year per department were performed for hernia surgery (n=5 departments), gastric bypass (n=2 departments), cholecystectomy, fundoplication, and colon surgery (each n=1 department). Conclusions: The number and range of robotic procedures performed in Switzerland varied widely. Higher accreditation for general surgery or subspecialization of visceral surgery of the department was positively associated with the use of robotic techniques, reflecting an unequal availability of robotic surgery.

Range of Motion of the Upper Extremity in a Healthy Pediatric Population: Introduction to Normative Data.

Objective In the pediatric population traumatic injuries of the upper extremity are common. After therapy a decision has to be made if the mobility of the joint lies within a normal range. The purpose of this study was to give an introduction to normative data. We investigate if there is a significant difference in the range of motion (ROM) between male and female probands and furthermore, if an effect of the age can be detected. Methods We performed an institutional review board-approved study of healthy girls and boys aged between 2 and 16 years without any medical history of an upper extremity fracture. We investigated the active ROM of the elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal, and interphalangeal joints. Furthermore, age, handedness, weight, and height were recorded. A total of 171 adolescents with a mean age of 10.6 years were included and separated into four cohorts by age: 2 to 5, 6 to 10, 11 to 13, and 14 to 16 years. Results We found significant differences between the genders in the age group from 11 to 13 years for the flexion of the elbow, the pronation, the flexion of the interphalangeal joint of the thumb, as well as the flexion of the metacarpophalangeal joints of digitus II to V. Furthermore, a significant difference in the same joints except from the elbow flexion could be demonstrated between the genders. Conclusion Our study contributes normative data for upper extremity ROM in the pediatric population and presents a gender-related difference in certain joints. Clinical Relevance Normative data for the ROM of upper extremity joints in children is helpful for the evaluation of pediatric orthopedic patients and provides the framework for therapeutic resolution. Since a great number of traumatic injuries in children affect the upper extremity, this information may help the physician to estimate the impact of the injury and decide on the therapeutic management.