پیوندهای مفید
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 21 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 1,284 |
| تعداد مقالات | 11,740 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 82,786,603 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 121,661,350 |
Patient Perceptions of Minimally Invasive Robotic Surgery: A Systematic Review | ||
| Iranian Journal of Colorectal Research | ||
| مقاله 2، دوره 13، شماره 4، اسفند 2025، صفحه 120-127 اصل مقاله (1.04 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Review Article | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/acrr.2026.108704.1265 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Arpit Aggarwal1؛ Maryam Aleissa* 2؛ Saakshi Joshi3؛ Ernesto Drelichman1؛ Vijay Mittal1؛ Jasneet Bhullar1 | ||
| 1Department of Surgery - Henry Ford Hospital- Michigan State University Collage of Humen Medicine. Southfield - MI USA | ||
| 2Department of Surgery - Henry Ford Hospital - Michigan state university, collage of human medicine - Southfield - MI Collage of Medicine - Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman university - Riyadh -KSA | ||
| 3Department of Internal Medicine, McLaren- Macomb, Macomb, MI | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Advances in digital and mechanical technologies have profoundly transformed modern surgery. Since its approval by the Food and Drug Administration in 2000, the widespread integration of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has created a complex ethical and political dynamic involving patients, healthcare professionals, manufacturers, and legislators. In this systematic review, we aimed to identify potential patient- and industryrelated drawbacks of RAS early on and to promote public awareness of the technology. Published data on patient perceptions of RAS from 2000 to 2024 were analyzed using the PubMed gateway and Cochrane Library databases. Studies focusing on clinical outcomes or the perceptions of surgeons and healthcare workers were excluded. Extracted data included sample size, methodology, information sources, prevalent perceptions, and willingness to undergo RAS. A total of 12 studies involving 35,769 participants met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Acceptance of RAS was higher among individuals with higher education levels and in countries where RAS is commonly practiced; however, concerns about manufacturing defects and the surgeon’s experience with RAS persisted. Most participants understood that RAS offers greater precision, less pain, and enables faster recovery. However, many believed that the robot operated autonomously. Previous experience with and perceived ease of use of the robotic surgery platform were inversely associated with patients’ information levels, suggesting that increased exposure may lead to a more realistic but not necessarily deeper understanding of robotic surgery. All included studies were questionnaire-based and varied in design, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. We conclude that the healthcare industry faces new challenges as innovation influences the sacred patient-physician relationship. Ethical and legal considerations, including informed consent, machine malfunction, cost-effectiveness, and troubleshooting support, affect patients’ perceptions. Additionally, the media plays a significant role in shaping public understanding of RAS. Registration: PROSPERO ID CRD42025630165. | ||
تازه های تحقیق | ||
Arpit Aggarwal (Google Scholar) Maryam Aleissa (Google Scholar) | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Key Words: Robotic Surgical Procedures؛ Perception؛ Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
1. George EI, Brand CTC, Marescaux J. Origins of robotic surgery: from skepticism to standard of care. Jsls .2018;22(4):e2018. 00039. 2. Satava RMJTScoNA. Robotic surgery: from past to future--a personal journey. Surg Clin North Am.2003;83(6):1491-500, xii. 3. Benabid A, Cinquin P, Lavalle S, et al. Computer-driven robot for stereotactic surgery connected to CT scan and magnetic resonance imaging: technological design and preliminary results. Appl Neurophysiol. 1987;50(1-6):153-4. 4. Surgical Robotics and Navigation Market Analysis, Size, Share & COVID-19 Impact Analysis | Global | 2022-2028 | MedSuite | Includes: ENT Surgical Navigation Market, Minimally Invasive Surgery Robotics Systems Market, and 8 more. 09/22/2022. Accessed 12/25/2023 https://idataresearch.com/product/ surgical-robotics-and-navigationmarket/. 2025 5. Wilson M, Badani KJTUCoNA. Competing Robotic Systems: A Preview. Urologic Clinics of North America. 2020;48(1):147-50. 6. Torrent-Sellens J, Jiménez-Zarco AI, Saigí-Rubió F. Do People Trust in Robot-Assisted Surgery? Evidence from Europe. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(23):12519. 7. Martinello N, Loshak H. Experiences with and expectations of robotic surgical systems: a rapid qualitative review. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health.2020. 8. Arshad S, Brar G, Xu S, et al. 222 Robotic Surgery: Public Perceptions and Current Misconceptions. British Journal of Surgery. 2022;109(Supplement_1):znac040. 20. 9. Saniotis A, Henneberg MJEiS, Politics E. Neurosurgical robots and ethical challenges to medicine. Ethics Sci Environ Politics. 2021;21:25-30. 10. Kim WT, Ham WS, Jeong W, et al. Failure and malfunction of da Vinci Surgical systems during various robotic surgeries: experience from six departments at a single institute. Urology. 2009;74(6):1234-7. 11. Ferrarese A, Pozzi G, Borghi F, et al. Malfunctions of robotic system in surgery: role and responsibility of surgeon in legal point of view. Open Med (Wars). 2016;11(1):286-91. 12. Giffen Z, Ezzone A, Ekwenna OJPO. Robotic stapler use: Is it safe?–FDA database analysis across multiple surgical specialties. PLoS One. 2021;16(6):e0253548. 13. Ahmad A, Ahmad ZF, Carleton JD, et al. Robotic surgery: current perceptions and the clinical evidence. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(1):255-63. 14. Chu CM, Agrawal A, Mazloomdoost D, et al. Patients’ knowledge of and attitude toward robotic surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2019;25(4):279-83. 15. McDermott H, Choudhury N, Lewin-Runacres M, et al. Gender differences in understanding and acceptance of robot-assisted surgery. J Robot Surg.2020;14(1):227-32. 16. Buabbas AJ, Aldousari S, Shehab AAJBmi, et al. An exploratory study of public’awareness about roboticsassisted surgery in Kuwait. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2020;20(1):140. 17. Aldousari SA, Buabbas AJ, Yaiesh SM, et al. Multiple perceptions of robotic-assisted surgery among surgeons and patients: a crosssectional study. J Robot Surg. 2021;15(4):529-38. 18. Anania EC, Rice S, Winter SRJJoRS. Building a predictive model of US patient willingness to undergo robotic surgery. J Robot Surg. 2021;15(2):203-14. 19. Muaddi H, Zhao X, Leonardelli GJ, et al. Fear of innovation: public’s perception of robotic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2022;36(8):6076-83. 20. Algethami RF, Alotbi MF, Alsulaimani AI, et al. Assessment of knowledge and awareness regarding robotics-assisted surgery (RAS) among Saudi population: a cross sectional study. Medical Science. 2023;27(132):1-9. 21. Irfan Thalib H, Tahir K, Shrouq Amin A, et al. Public awareness and perception of robotic-assisted surgery: a cross-sectional analysis of sociodemographic influences. Frontiers in public health. 2025;13:1662689. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 61 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 81 |
||