Ergonomic aspects of four different types of laparoscopic instrument handles with respect to elbow angle
Ergonomic aspects of four different types of laparoscopic instrument handles with respect to elbow angle
复制标题
四种不同类型的腹腔镜器械手柄在肘部角度方面的人体工程学方面
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2002
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Faist
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
U. Matern;C. Giebmeyer;R. Bergmann;P. Waller;M. Faist
摘要背景：只有少数研究已经测试了不同的人体工程学方面的工作姿势假设腹腔镜外科医生。虽然没有实验数据可用于腹腔镜设置，但前臂水平或肘部角度90°至120°的工作姿势已被推荐用于执行微创手术（MIS）。不同肌肉的肌电图（EMG）活动的比较提供了关于每块肌肉产生的力的信息，并允许评估其对功能性运动的贡献。目前的研究旨在调查某些手柄是否不支持这种姿势。方法：在这项研究中，12名志愿者被置于两种不同的标准化手臂位置，定义为肘角90°和120°。他们使用四种不同类型的器械手柄设计操作0.1 N和2.5 N微动开关：轴向手柄、环形手柄、柄部手柄和Hirschberg手柄。在测试过程中，记录五块前臂肌肉的EMG活动，并相对于相应肌肉的最大随意活动进行归一化。结果如下：对于一个简单的抓握动作，几乎没有发现任何五块前臂肌肉的两个肘部角度之间的EMG活动有显着差异。因此，对于120°和90°手肘角度，操作不同类型MIS手柄所需的肌肉活动相似。结论：目前的研究并没有显示在一个简单的抓握动作中，四个手柄中的任何一个的两个肘部角度与前臂主要肌肉所需的力之间的相关差异。
AbstractsBackground: Only few studies have tested different ergonomic aspects of the working posture assumed by laparoscopic surgeons. Although no experimental data are available for a laparoscopic setting, a working posture with a horizontal forearm or an elbow angle 90° to 120° has been recommended for performing minimally invasive surgery (MIS). The comparison of electromyogram (EMG) activities in different muscles provides information about the force developed by each muscle and allows assessment of its contribution to a functional movement. The current study aimed to investigate whether certain handles do not support this posture. Methods: For this study, 12 volunteers were postured in two different standardized arm positions, defined by elbow angles of 90° and 120°. They were manipulating a 0.1-N and a 2.5-N microswitch with four different types of instrument handle design: axial handle, ring handle, shank handle, Hirschberg handle. During the test, the EMG activities of five forearm muscles were recorded and normalized with respect to the maximum voluntary activity of the respective muscle. Results: Virtually no significant difference in EMG activity was found between the two elbow angles in any of five forearm muscles for a simple grasping maneuver. Thus, the muscle activity required to manipulate different types of MIS handles is similar for the elbow angles of 120° and 90°. Conclusions: The current study did not show relevant differences between the two elbow angles for any of the four handles during a simple grasping maneuver with respect to the force required in the main forearm muscles.