MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390823732 · doi:10.58974/bjss/azbc030

Surgical ergonomics: how and where to start?

2024· article· en· W4390823732 on OpenAlexaff
Julie Hallet, Fahad Alam, M. Susan Hallbeck

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman factors and ergonomicsOperations managementComputer scienceEngineeringMedicineMedical emergencyPoison control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The field of ergonomics is dedicated to understanding the interactions between humans and elements of a system, with one of the core tenets of ergonomic approaches being the need to fit the environment to workers.It includes physical, cognitive, and organizational ergonomics that are all needed to create safe and efficient work environment (Figure 1).In the fast paced and high-stakes operating room (OR) environment, this principle is often forgotten.Surgeons, anaesthetists, and nurses alike tend to adapt their cognitive and physical work to a sometimes hostile work environment.Poor ergonomics in the OR can lead to musculoskeletal disorders, absenteeism, modification in clinical practice, reduced career longevity, and burn out, in addition to downstream repercussions on the risk of intra-operative complications, patient safety, and sustainability of the healthcare workforce (Figure 2).1-4 One of the main protective factors against poor ergonomics is awareness of optimal practices.5 This review will present key principles for optimal ergonomics in the OR. Personal equipmentThis aspect is one that can be more easily controlled by individuals in the OR.• Shoes: Well adapted footwear can prevent complaints related to lower extremity discomfort from prolonged standing, such as sore feet, lower limb oedema, muscle fatigue and low back pain.Shoes should allow for toe freedom, arch support, and have a 1-2.5cm heel (flat shoes increase strain on the Achilles tendon).6• Stockings: Knee-high compression stockings of 15-20 mmHg are suggested to reduce lower extremity muscle pain, fatigue, and oedema.• Loupes: Because forward head posture increases loading on the cervical spine by up to 20 kg, it is crucial to wear well-fitted loupes if they are needed.Neck flexion with loupes should not exceed 25 degrees to prevent spine and neck strain.Good posture without extensive flexion of the lower and especially cervical spine is important in decreasing musculoskeletal injuries (Figure 3).Consider trying high declination loupes or exoscopes.• Led aprons: Wearing a lead apron increases body temperature by up to 1˚C, impacts on body mechanics, and adds strain to trapezoid and temporalis muscles and the lumbar spine.7 Wearing a well-fitted apron including a vest and kilt/skirt is recommended over a single apron.In addition, weight-reliever aprons and back-aids such as exoskeletons exist, if needed 8

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.011
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSurgical Simulation and Training→French-language works237,207→