The Vertical Needle Holder: A Proof-of-Concept Evaluation of a Novel Instrument for Precision Suturing in Confined Surgical Fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/NeedPrecision suturing in confined surgical fields poses ergonomic and visibility challenges, particularly in minimally invasive and reconstructive procedures. A novel Vertical Needle Holder (VNH) was designed to enhance control, angle precision, and accessibility in restricted spaces.Methodology and Device DescriptionThis proof-of-concept study evaluated the VNH's ergonomic design and suturing performance compared with a standard Mayo-Hegar needle holder. Thirty surgeons and surgical trainees participated in simulated suturing tasks using both instruments. Surgeon-reported outcomes were assessed using standardized synthetic-tissue suturing tasks and a structured Likert-scale questionnaire focusing on perceived precision, ergonomics, and ease of use.Preliminary ResultsSurgeons reported improved perceived precision and maneuverability of the VNH in confined spaces compared with conventional needle holders. Participants reported reduced wrist strain and greater visibility. The majority of participants (87%) rated the VNH as ergonomically superior to conventional needle holder designs.Current StatusThese findings suggest that the VNH offers an innovative, practical enhancement to traditional surgical tools, potentially improving safety and efficiency in complex operative fields. Further clinical validation is underway to confirm translational applicability.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".