Cited by 12Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal DisordersOccupational Health and Safety in WorkplacesSurgical Simulation and Training

Physical and Psychological Impact of Surgery on the Operating Surgeon

Open access
Amirthanayagam, Anumithra, O'Neill, Seth, Goss, Charles, Moss, Esther L·2024·International Journal of Gynecological Cancer

Abstract

The impact of surgery on the surgeon's well-being encompasses both physical and psychological aspects. Physically, surgeons are at risk of work-related musculoskeletal symptoms due to the nature of their work, and this risk can be impacted by theater environment, equipment design, and workload. Many symptoms will be self-limiting, but work related musculoskeletal symptoms can lead to the development of an injury, which can have far reaching effects, including the need for medical or surgical treatment, time away from work, or a change in clinical duties. Additionally, surgery can place a significant cognitive workload on the lead operator and this can be exacerbated, or alleviated, by the surgical environment, experience of the assistance, surgical modality, and case complexity. Measuring and quantifying the impact of surgery on the surgeon is a challenging undertaking. Tools such as motion capture, physiological markers, including heart rate variability and salivary cortisol, and questionnaires can provide insights into understanding the overall impact of surgery on the surgeon. A holistic approach that incorporates injury prevention strategies, communication, and support, is vital in assessing and mitigating risk factors. Injury prevention assessment tools and interventions that can be used within the busy surgical environment are needed, alongside increased ergonomic awareness. Addressing the impact of surgery on the surgeon is a multifaceted challenge, and long term positive changes can only be sustained with the support of the whole surgical team and healthcare organizations by developing and maintaining a supportive working environment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/ijgc-2023-004594

Cites

82 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Physical discomfort can increase cognitive load and impair motor control, negatively affecting clinical results.

    “Although no specific study has investigated how the discomfort a clinician experiences from computer workstation setup directly affects diagnostic performance in clinical environments, a study on surgical performance showed that physical discomfort can increase cognitive load and impair motor control, which can negatively affect clinical results [310].”

    From Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors (2026) · cites this paper as [310]

    The Introduction discusses the potential impact of surgeons’ pain on motor control and patient outcomes, while the Psychological Impact section says excessive stress can impair technical performance. But the paper does not establish that physical discomfort increases cognitive load; its Introduction identifies other factors that increase it. The cited work is also a review, not a surgical-performance study demonstrating the full causal chain. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Feathers D, D'Souza C, Paquet V. Chapter 27: anthropometry for ergonomic design. In: Evaluation of Human Work. Taylor and Francis Inc, 2015: 725-51.
  2. Pheasant S, Haslegrave CM. Bodyspace: Anthropometry, Ergonomics and the Design of Work. CRC press, 2018. · DOI
  3. Hardy L. A catastorophe model of performance in sport. In: Stress and Performance in Sports. John Wiley & Sons, 1990: 81-106.
  4. Oxford Academic. Fitness for Work: The Medical Aspects. Oxford: Oxford Academic, 2019.
  5. Farsworth B. Heart rate variability -how to analyse ECG data? iMotions; 2019. Available: https://imotions.com/blog/learning/best- practice/heart-rate-variability/ on May 11, 2024 by guest. Protected by copyright. http://ijgc.bmj.com/ Int J Gynecol Cancer: first published as 10.1136/ijgc-2023-004594 on 4 March 2024. Downloaded

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Amirthanayagam, A., O'Neill, S., Goss, C., & Moss, E. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Leicester (GB)
  • University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Moss, Esther L
Venue
International Journal of Gynecological Cancer
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-03
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
459-467
ISSN
1048-891X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4392374426
Cited by
12
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1
FWCI
1.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Gynecological Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Safety in Workplaces
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical Simulation and Training
Keywords
surgeon well-being, work-related musculoskeletal symptoms, occupational injuries, mental workload, operating room environment, surgical instrument design, workload, heart rate variability, salivary cortisol, motion capture, injury prevention, human factors, psychological impact of surgery
MeSH terms
Communication, Equipment Design, Humans, Hydrocortisone, Physical Examination, Surgeons

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review