• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
  • Search
    • Search All SAGES Content
    • Search SAGES Guidelines
    • Search the Video Library
    • Search the Image Library
    • Search the Abstracts Archive
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2026 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
  • Opportunities
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • OWLS/FLS
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Fls Tasks Can Be Used to Identify Ergonomic Differences Between Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery

Fls Tasks Can Be Used to Identify Ergonomic Differences Between Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery

Ahmed M Zihni, MD, MPH, Ikechukwu Ohu, MS, Jaime A Cavallo, MD, MPHS, Jenny Ousley, BS, Sohyung Cho, PhD, Michael M Awad, MD, PhD

Department of Surgery, Section of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri; Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville; Edwardsville, IL

INTRODUCTION: It has been well documented that surgeons suffer significant ergonomic stress when performing laparoscopic procedures. Robotic surgery holds the promise for ergonomic improvements to the field of minimally invasive surgery. This advantage can potentially be quantified using surface EMG. In this pilot study, we describe a method for identifying ergonomic differences between laparoscopic and robotic surgical platforms in a dry-lab setting using validated Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) tasks. We hypothesize that performing FLS tasks on laparoscopic and robotic surgical platforms will produce statistically significant differences in mean muscle activation, as quantified by surface EMG.

METHODS: Six subjects with varying levels of surgical experience performed FLS peg transfer (PT), pattern cutting (PC), and intracorporeal suturing (IS) tasks on laparoscopic and robotic platforms. Surface EMG measurements were obtained from each subject’s bilateral bicep, tricep, deltoid, and trapezius muscles. EMG measurements were normalized to the maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) of each muscle group. Average normalized muscle activation (%MVC) was calculated for each muscle group on both surgical platforms for each FLS task. We compared mean %MVC values with paired t-tests and considered differences with a p-value less than 0.05 to be statistically significant.

RESULTS: In our pilot, mean activation of right bicep (2.7%MVC lap, 1.3%MVC robotic, p=0.019) and right deltoid muscles (2.4%MVC lap, 1.0%MVC robotic, p=0.019) were significantly elevated during the laparoscopic IS task, when compared to robotic IS. Mean activation of the right trapezius muscle was significantly elevated during robotic PT (1.6%MVC lap, 3.5%MVC robotic, p=0.040) and robotic PC (1.3%MVC lap, 3.6%MVC robotic, p=0.0018) tasks when compared to laparoscopic. On the robotic platform, no significant difference in %MVC was seen within any muscle group when comparing the %MVC generated by that muscle group while performing the three different tasks. On the laparoscopic platform, a significant difference in %MVC was seen in the right trapezius muscle group when comparing the three tasks (PT: 1.6%MVC, PC: 1.3%MVC, IS: 3.7% MVC, F-stat 4.171, Sig 0.036). No other significant differences were seen.

CONCLUSIONS: The use of FLS tasks is a validated, readily available, standardized instrument that is feasible for use in demonstrating ergonomic differences between laparoscopic and robotic surgical platforms. In our pilot study, we used FLS tasks to identify statistically significant differences in mean muscle activation of various muscle groups when performing laparoscopic and robotic surgical tasks. The use of FLS tasks can serve as the basis for larger studies to further detail ergonomic differences between laparoscopic and robotic surgery.


Session: Poster Presentation

Program Number: P382

219

Share this:

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) Pocket
  • Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
  • Click to share on Threads (Opens in new window) Threads
  • Click to share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky

Related


sages_adbutler_leaderboard

Hours & Info

11300 West Olympic Blvd, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90064

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2025 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals