ErgonomicsNCT01903577
Comparative Ergonomic Analysis of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Surgery
A study testing Robotic Task Performance and Laparoscopic Task Performance in people with Ergonomics, run by Washington University School of Medicine at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Robotic surgery holds the potential to overcome many of the ergonomic challenges posed by laparoscopic surgery. In this study, we propose to quantify this potential ergonomic benefit by measuring electromyography (EMG) and instrument motion analysis of subjects performing surgical tasks using robotic assistance versus… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Ergonomics
- What is being tested?
- Robotic Task Performance and Laparoscopic Task Performance
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 33 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Sep 2012to Aug 2017
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- age> 18 years
- medical student, resident, fellow, or attending in Surgery, Urology, or Obstetrics-Gynecology at Washington University School of Medicine
- performance of <100 laparoscopic cases and <50 robotic cases during one's career as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon
- age> 18 years
- resident, fellow, or attending in Surgery, Urology, or Obstetrics-Gynecology at Washington University School of Medicine
- performance of = or >100 laparoscopic cases during one's career and <50 robotic cases during one's career as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon
Show all 9Show fewer
- age> 18 years
- resident, fellow, or attending in Surgery, Urology, or Obstetrics-Gynecology at Washington University School of Medicine
- performance of = or >100 laparoscopic cases and = or >50 robotic cases during one's career as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon
Who cannot join
- age <18 years
- known severe skin sensitivities or allergies to adhesives
- Expert Laparoscopists/Novice Roboticists
- age <18 years
- known severe skin sensitivities or allergies to adhesives
- Expert Laparoscopists/Expert Roboticists
- age <18 years
- known severe skin sensitivities or allergies to adhesives
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine
St Louis, Missouri, 63110
About this study
Robotic surgery holds the potential to overcome many of the ergonomic challenges posed by laparoscopic surgery. In this study, we propose to quantify this potential ergonomic benefit by measuring electromyography (EMG) and instrument motion analysis of subjects performing surgical tasks using robotic assistance versus standard laparoscopic instrumentation.
Hypothesis: We hypothesize that surgeons will experience significant, measurable ergonomic advantages when performing tasks using robotic surgery when compared to conventional laparoscopic tools.
Read more
Study design: Subjects for the study will include three groups of varying degrees of training - (1) novice laparoscopists/novice roboticists, (2) expert laparoscopists/novice roboticists, and (3) expert laparoscopsts/expert roboticists. Subjects will perform the following tasks (chosen based on their reliability and validity in previous studies). Each task will be performed with standard laparoscopic instrumentation and with the da Vinci Surgical System.
- Inanimate (dry lab): Fundamentals of Laparoscopic (FLS) peg transfer, pattern cutting, intracorporeal suturing.
- Animate (porcine lab): laparoscopic bowel resection and anastomosis, robotic bowel resection and anastomosis.
- Human (clinical case): any laparoscopic or robotic procedure (preferably laparoscopic bowel resection and anastomosis, robotic bowel resection and anastomosis).
Outcome measures:
- Time to completion of tasks
- EMG: peak amplitudes, % maximum voluntary contraction and frequency analysis
- NASA Task Load Index scores
- Subject-Reported Qualitative Data from surveys
- Quality analysis of tasks (e.g., pattern cutting accuracy, % knots tied securely) for dry lab and animate lab tasks only)
- Instrument motion analysis of tasks (for dry lab and animate lab tasks only)
Read the detailed description
Under an IRB-approved protocol, medical students, residents, fellows, and attending surgeons of the Department of Surgery and the Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology of Washington University School of Medicine who respond to the email or mailed letter invitation for recruitment will be screened by the Principal Investigator or one of the approved study members listed on the IRB protocol for inclusion and exclusion criteria using the following 5 screening questions:
- What is your date of birth?
- Are you a medical student, a resident, a fellow, or an attending surgeon in general surgery, urology, or obstetrics-gynecology?
- Approximately how many laparoscopic surgeries have you performed as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon during your career?
- Approximately how many robotic surgeries have you performed as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon during your career?
- Do you have any known severe skin sensitivities or allergies to adhesives?
Those subjects who meet the inclusion criteria yet who are not disqualified by the exclusion criteria will be prospectively enrolled by an informed consent process into one of the three experimental groups of the study, defined by the subject's degrees of expertise in Minimally Invasive Surgery:
Inclusion Criteria:
- age> 18 years
- medical student, resident, fellow, or attending in Surgery, Urology, or Obstetrics-Gynecology at Washington University School of Medicine
- Inclusion in Novice Laparoscopist/Novice Roboticist Group: performance of <100 laparoscopic cases and <50 robotic cases as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon during one's career
- Inclusion in Expert Laparoscopist/Novice Roboticist Group: performance of = or >100 laparoscopic cases and <50 robotic cases as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon during one's career
- Inclusion in Expert Laparoscopist/Expert Roboticist Group: performance of = or >100 laparoscopic cases and = or >50 robotic cases as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon during one's career
Exclusion Criteria:
- age <18 years
- known severe skin sensitivities or allergies to adhesives
Screening, recruitment, and informed consent processes may be conducted by the Principal Investigator or any of the approved study members listed on the IRB protocol. To eliminate any potential for conflict of interest, recruitment and consent of medical students and residents for this study will be performed by a study investigator who does not have a supervisory role to medical students and residents, and not the Principal Investigator. To ensure that each subject is adequately informed of the study, the informed consent process will include but not be limited to discussion of the research procedures; anticipated frequency and types of participant interactions; length of the study period; potential risks and benefits to the participant; practices to protect the privacy and confidentiality of participants; the alternative to not participate in the clinical study; and means by which to ask questions, report concerns, or withdraw from the study at any time. Each subject will be informed that his decision to participate or not participate in the study does not in any way impact the health care decisions of his health care providers, or the clinical or academic performance evaluations of his evaluators. This information will also be included in the "Informed Consent Document" and the "Notice of Privacy Practices", and the content of these documents will be reviewed with each subject at the time of the informed consent discussion. Each subject will have the opportunity to review these documents at his leisure both before and after his decision to participate in the study, and each subject will receive at the time of the informed consent discussion a signed copy of the "Informed Consent Document" and the "Notice of Privacy Practices" to keep for his personal records. Each subject will be enrolled by informed consent discussion in a private environment to facilitate subject comfort in discussing details of the study and asking questions. During each subject enrollment attempt, the opportunity will be provided for the subject to meet individually with the approved study member listed on the IRB protocol to address private questions or concerns. Private environments may include a private office, a private conference room, or a private laboratory room. The subject will be able to discuss the study with family, friends, and/or others before deciding on participation. The subject will have until the end of the study enrollment period to consider study participation. Each subject who does not respond to the invitation to participate in the study at the time of the informed consent discussion will receive a copy of the "Informed Consent Document" and the "Notice of Privacy Practices" signed by the approved study member listed on the IRB protocol with whom informed consent was discussed, and a stamped envelope addressed to the Principal Investigator in the event that the subject wishes to consent to the study at a later time within the enrollment period. There will not be any follow-up contact regarding the study with subjects who do not wish to respond to the invitation to participate in the study. Capacity to consent for all subjects to be enrolled in the study will be determined by the approved study member listed on the IRB protocol conducting the informed consent. Capacity to consent will be assessed in a variety of ways such as explaining the study to the subject and then asking him to answer basic questions about the study procedures, risks and benefits, options for skipping questions, or how to withdraw from the study. The document entitled "Evaluation to Sign an Informed Consent" provided by the IRB may be a resource used to assist with this assessment. If at any time the approved study member listed on the IRB protocol has reason to believe that the subject is incompetent or incapacitated to make decisions for himself, the consent process will be aborted, and the subject will not be enrolled in the study.
- Conditions
- Ergonomics
- Being tested
- Robotic Task Performance, Laparoscopic Task Performance
- Keywords
- Ergonomics, Robotic Surgery, Laparoscopic Surgery
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Robotic Task PerformanceOther
Subjects will perform FLS tasks on the robotic platform while EMG data is being collected. Task performance and NASA task load index will be assessed. Experts in robotic surgery will also perform operative cases while EMG is being collected.
Laparoscopic Task PerformanceOther
Subjects will perform FLS tasks on the laparoscopic platform while EMG data is being collected. Task performance and NASA task load index will be assessed. Experts in laparoscopic surgery will also perform operative cases while EMG is being collected.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Novice Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgeons | Experimental | Students and surgical trainees with less than 100 laparoscopic and less than 50 robotic cases.
Will participate in Robotic Task Performance and Laparoscopic Task Performance Receives: Other: Robotic Task Performance; Other: Laparoscopic Task Performance |
| Expert Laparoscopists, Novice Roboticists | Experimental | Surgeons with more than 100 laparoscopic cases, less than 50 robotic cases.
Will participate in Robotic Task Performance and Laparoscopic Task Performance Receives: Other: Robotic Task Performance; Other: Laparoscopic Task Performance |
| Expert robotic and laparoscopic surgeons | Experimental | Surgeons with greater than 100 laparoscopic and greater than 50 robotic cases.
Will participate in Robotic Task Performance and Laparoscopic Task Performance Receives: Other: Robotic Task Performance; Other: Laparoscopic Task Performance |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
%MVC
EMG: % maximum voluntary contraction will be calculated during each task repetition and surgical task
Measured: At the time of Robotic and Laparoscopic Task Performance
Secondary outcomes (3)
Completion time
Time to completion of tasks
Measured: At the time of Robotic and Laparoscopic Task Performance
NASA Task Load Index
NASA Task Load Index scores in each of the six domains tested will be compared for laparoscopic and robotic surgical platforms
Measured: At the time of Robotic and Laparoscopic Task Performance
Quality analysis of tasks
Quality analysis of tasks performed (pattern cutting accuracy, % knots tied securely) for dry lab tasks only
Measured: At the time of Robotic and Laparoscopic Task Performance
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted19 Jul 2013 (estimated)
- Study startSep 2012
- Primary completionAug 2017
- Study completionAug 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for ErgonomicsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Washington University School of MedicineThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 33 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Washington University School of Medicine
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Intuitive Surgical, Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons, Southern Illinois University
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Michael M Awad, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, Washington University School of Medicine
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01903577
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Robotic Ergonomics-201101766
- Status last verified
- Nov 2018
- First submitted
- 2 Jul 2013
- Last updated
- 21 Nov 2018
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Nov 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparative Ergonomic Analysis of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Surgery
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01903577
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Robotic Ergonomics-201101766
- Conditions
- Ergonomics
- Keywords
- Ergonomics, Robotic Surgery, Laparoscopic Surgery
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Terminated
- Enrolment
- 33 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Washington University School of MedicineUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Intuitive Surgical, Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons, Southern Illinois University
- Study start
- Sep 2012
- Primary completion
- Aug 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- Aug 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 19 Jul 2013 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Robotic surgery holds the potential to overcome many of the ergonomic challenges posed by laparoscopic surgery. In this study, we propose to quantify this potential ergonomic benefit by measuring electromyography (EMG) and instrument motion analysis of subjects performing surgical tasks using robotic assistance versus standard laparoscopic instrumentation.
Hypothesis: We hypothesize that surgeons will experience significant, measurable ergonomic advantages when performing tasks using robotic surgery when compared to conventional laparoscopic tools.
Study design: Subjects for the study will include three groups of varying degrees of training - (1) novice laparoscopists/novice roboticists, (2) expert laparoscopists/novice roboticists, and (3) expert laparoscopsts/expert roboticists. Subjects will perform the following tasks (chosen based on their reliability and validity in previous studies). Each task will be performed with standard laparoscopic instrumentation and with the da Vinci Surgical System.
- Inanimate (dry lab): Fundamentals of Laparoscopic (FLS) peg transfer, pattern cutting, intracorporeal suturing.
- Animate (porcine lab): laparoscopic bowel resection and anastomosis, robotic bowel resection and anastomosis.
- Human (clinical case): any laparoscopic or robotic procedure (preferably laparoscopic bowel resection and anastomosis, robotic bowel resection and anastomosis).
Outcome measures:
- Time to completion of tasks
- EMG: peak amplitudes, % maximum voluntary contraction and frequency analysis
- NASA Task Load Index scores
- Subject-Reported Qualitative Data from surveys
- Quality analysis of tasks (e.g., pattern cutting accuracy, % knots tied securely) for dry lab and animate lab tasks only)
- Instrument motion analysis of tasks (for dry lab and animate lab tasks only)
Detailed description
Under an IRB-approved protocol, medical students, residents, fellows, and attending surgeons of the Department of Surgery and the Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology of Washington University School of Medicine who respond to the email or mailed letter invitation for recruitment will be screened by the Principal Investigator or one of the approved study members listed on the IRB protocol for inclusion and exclusion criteria using the following 5 screening questions:
- What is your date of birth?
- Are you a medical student, a resident, a fellow, or an attending surgeon in general surgery, urology, or obstetrics-gynecology?
- Approximately how many laparoscopic surgeries have you performed as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon during your career?
- Approximately how many robotic surgeries have you performed as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon during your career?
- Do you have any known severe skin sensitivities or allergies to adhesives?
Those subjects who meet the inclusion criteria yet who are not disqualified by the exclusion criteria will be prospectively enrolled by an informed consent process into one of the three experimental groups of the study, defined by the subject's degrees of expertise in Minimally Invasive Surgery:
Inclusion Criteria:
- age> 18 years
- medical student, resident, fellow, or attending in Surgery, Urology, or Obstetrics-Gynecology at Washington University School of Medicine
- Inclusion in Novice Laparoscopist/Novice Roboticist Group: performance of <100 laparoscopic cases and <50 robotic cases as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon during one's career
- Inclusion in Expert Laparoscopist/Novice Roboticist Group: performance of = or >100 laparoscopic cases and <50 robotic cases as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon during one's career
- Inclusion in Expert Laparoscopist/Expert Roboticist Group: performance of = or >100 laparoscopic cases and = or >50 robotic cases as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon during one's career
Exclusion Criteria:
- age <18 years
- known severe skin sensitivities or allergies to adhesives
Screening, recruitment, and informed consent processes may be conducted by the Principal Investigator or any of the approved study members listed on the IRB protocol. To eliminate any potential for conflict of interest, recruitment and consent of medical students and residents for this study will be performed by a study investigator who does not have a supervisory role to medical students and residents, and not the Principal Investigator. To ensure that each subject is adequately informed of the study, the informed consent process will include but not be limited to discussion of the research procedures; anticipated frequency and types of participant interactions; length of the study period; potential risks and benefits to the participant; practices to protect the privacy and confidentiality of participants; the alternative to not participate in the clinical study; and means by which to ask questions, report concerns, or withdraw from the study at any time. Each subject will be informed that his decision to participate or not participate in the study does not in any way impact the health care decisions of his health care providers, or the clinical or academic performance evaluations of his evaluators. This information will also be included in the "Informed Consent Document" and the "Notice of Privacy Practices", and the content of these documents will be reviewed with each subject at the time of the informed consent discussion. Each subject will have the opportunity to review these documents at his leisure both before and after his decision to participate in the study, and each subject will receive at the time of the informed consent discussion a signed copy of the "Informed Consent Document" and the "Notice of Privacy Practices" to keep for his personal records. Each subject will be enrolled by informed consent discussion in a private environment to facilitate subject comfort in discussing details of the study and asking questions. During each subject enrollment attempt, the opportunity will be provided for the subject to meet individually with the approved study member listed on the IRB protocol to address private questions or concerns. Private environments may include a private office, a private conference room, or a private laboratory room. The subject will be able to discuss the study with family, friends, and/or others before deciding on participation. The subject will have until the end of the study enrollment period to consider study participation. Each subject who does not respond to the invitation to participate in the study at the time of the informed consent discussion will receive a copy of the "Informed Consent Document" and the "Notice of Privacy Practices" signed by the approved study member listed on the IRB protocol with whom informed consent was discussed, and a stamped envelope addressed to the Principal Investigator in the event that the subject wishes to consent to the study at a later time within the enrollment period. There will not be any follow-up contact regarding the study with subjects who do not wish to respond to the invitation to participate in the study. Capacity to consent for all subjects to be enrolled in the study will be determined by the approved study member listed on the IRB protocol conducting the informed consent. Capacity to consent will be assessed in a variety of ways such as explaining the study to the subject and then asking him to answer basic questions about the study procedures, risks and benefits, options for skipping questions, or how to withdraw from the study. The document entitled "Evaluation to Sign an Informed Consent" provided by the IRB may be a resource used to assist with this assessment. If at any time the approved study member listed on the IRB protocol has reason to believe that the subject is incompetent or incapacitated to make decisions for himself, the consent process will be aborted, and the subject will not be enrolled in the study.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Novice Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgeons | Experimental | Other: Robotic Task Performance, Other: Laparoscopic Task PerformanceStudents and surgical trainees with less than 100 laparoscopic and less than 50 robotic cases. Will participate in Robotic Task Performance and Laparoscopic Task Performance |
| Expert Laparoscopists, Novice Roboticists | Experimental | Other: Robotic Task Performance, Other: Laparoscopic Task PerformanceSurgeons with more than 100 laparoscopic cases, less than 50 robotic cases. Will participate in Robotic Task Performance and Laparoscopic Task Performance |
| Expert robotic and laparoscopic surgeons | Experimental | Other: Robotic Task Performance, Other: Laparoscopic Task PerformanceSurgeons with greater than 100 laparoscopic and greater than 50 robotic cases. Will participate in Robotic Task Performance and Laparoscopic Task Performance |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (9 listed)
- age> 18 years
- medical student, resident, fellow, or attending in Surgery, Urology, or Obstetrics-Gynecology at Washington University School of Medicine
- performance of <100 laparoscopic cases and <50 robotic cases during one's career as primary surgeon or first assistant surgeon
- age> 18 years
- resident, fellow, or attending in Surgery, Urology, or Obstetrics-Gynecology at Washington University School of Medicine
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- age <18 years
- known severe skin sensitivities or allergies to adhesives
- Expert Laparoscopists/Novice Roboticists
- age <18 years
- known severe skin sensitivities or allergies to adhesives
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Robotic Task PerformanceSubjects will perform FLS tasks on the robotic platform while EMG data is being collected. Task performance and NASA task load index will be assessed. Experts in robotic surgery will also perform operative cases while EMG is being collected. | Other | Expert Laparoscopists, Novice Roboticists, Expert robotic and laparoscopic surgeons, Novice Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgeons |
| Laparoscopic Task PerformanceSubjects will perform FLS tasks on the laparoscopic platform while EMG data is being collected. Task performance and NASA task load index will be assessed. Experts in laparoscopic surgery will also perform operative cases while EMG is being collected. | Other | Expert Laparoscopists, Novice Roboticists, Expert robotic and laparoscopic surgeons, Novice Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgeons |
Primary outcome
%MVC
Time frame: At the time of Robotic and Laparoscopic Task Performance
EMG: % maximum voluntary contraction will be calculated during each task repetition and surgical task
3 secondary outcomes
Completion time
Time frame: At the time of Robotic and Laparoscopic Task Performance
NASA Task Load Index
Time frame: At the time of Robotic and Laparoscopic Task Performance
Quality analysis of tasks
Time frame: At the time of Robotic and Laparoscopic Task Performance
Results and safety
The study was stopped early. Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 21 Nov 2018.
Related trials for Ergonomics
RecruitingObservational study
Musculoskeletal Discomfort and Ergonomic Factors in Midwifery Students
Musculoskeletal Discomfort, Ergonomic Risk Perception
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Hydration, Ergonomic Risk, and Fatigue Across Multiple PepsiCo Facilities
Hydration Status and Ergonomic Risk in Frontline Workers
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Use of Apple Vision Pro as Virtual Monitor for Diagnostic and Therapeutic Procedures
Device Convenience, Device Performance
Not yet recruiting
Posture Protection Program for Musculoskeletal Disorders and Ergonomic Risk in Hospital Cleaning Staff
Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders, Ergonomic Risk Exposure
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Anesthesia Equipment Position on Anesthesiologists' Performance
Anesthesia Ergonomics, Anesthesia Airway Management
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Michael M Awad, MD, PhD principal investigator
Washington University School of Medicine
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Robotic Task Performance and Laparoscopic Task Performance in people with Ergonomics, run by Washington University School of Medicine at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 9 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 21 Nov 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study was stopped early. Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
%MVC (time frame: At the time of Robotic and Laparoscopic Task Performance). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 21 Nov 2018; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 31 Oct 2026.