Comparison of cognitive workload and surgical outcomes between a three-dimensional and conventional microscope macular hole surgery

Abstract Background Performing a surgical task subjects the surgeon to multitudinal stressors, especially with the newer 3D technology. The quantum of cognitive workload using this modern surgical system in comparison to the Conventional microscope system remains unexplored. We evaluate the surgeon’...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Aditya Kelkar, S. Natarajan, Akshay Kothari, Mounika Bolisetty
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2024-03-01
Series:BMC Ophthalmology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-024-03361-5
_version_ 1827328169377529856
author Aditya Kelkar
S. Natarajan
Akshay Kothari
Mounika Bolisetty
author_facet Aditya Kelkar
S. Natarajan
Akshay Kothari
Mounika Bolisetty
author_sort Aditya Kelkar
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background Performing a surgical task subjects the surgeon to multitudinal stressors, especially with the newer 3D technology. The quantum of cognitive workload using this modern surgical system in comparison to the Conventional microscope system remains unexplored. We evaluate the surgeon’s cognitive workload and the surgical outcomes of macular hole(MH) surgery performed on a 3D versus a Conventional microscope operating system. Methods 50 eyes of 50 patients with MH undergoing surgery using the 3D or Conventional microscope visualization system. Cognitive workload assessment was done by real-time tools(Surgeons’ heart rate [HR] and oxygen saturation[SPO2]) and self-report tool(Surgery Task Load Index[SURG-TLX] questionnaire) of three Vitreoretinal surgeons. Based on the SURG-TLX questionnaire, an assessment of the workload was performed. Results Of the 50 eyes, 30 eyes and 20 eyes underwent surgery with the Conventional microscope and the 3D system, respectively. No difference was noted in the MH basal-diameter(p = 0.128), total surgical-duration(p = 0.299), internal-limiting membrane(ILM) peel time(p = 0.682), and the final visual acuity (VA; p = 0.515) between the two groups. Both groups showed significant improvement in VA(p < 0.001) with a 90% closure rate at one-month post-surgery. Cognitive workload comparison, the intraoperative HR(p = 0.024), total workload score(P = 0.005), and temporal-demand dimension(p = 0.004) were significantly more in Conventional microscope group as compared to 3D group. In both the groups, the HR increased significantly from the baseline while performing ILM peeling and at the end. Conclusion The surgeon’s cognitive workload is markedly reduced while performing macular hole surgery with a 3D viewing system. Moreover, duration of surgery including ILM peel time, MH closure rates, and visual outcomes remains unaffected irrespective of the operating microscope system.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T15:14:05Z
format Article
id doaj.art-6a9c65c24f584914bb7f2747f1796609
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1471-2415
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T15:14:05Z
publishDate 2024-03-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Ophthalmology
spelling doaj.art-6a9c65c24f584914bb7f2747f17966092024-03-05T18:02:41ZengBMCBMC Ophthalmology1471-24152024-03-012411710.1186/s12886-024-03361-5Comparison of cognitive workload and surgical outcomes between a three-dimensional and conventional microscope macular hole surgeryAditya Kelkar0S. Natarajan1Akshay Kothari2Mounika Bolisetty3National Institute Of OphthalmologyAditya Jyot eye hospitalNational Institute Of OphthalmologyNational Institute Of OphthalmologyAbstract Background Performing a surgical task subjects the surgeon to multitudinal stressors, especially with the newer 3D technology. The quantum of cognitive workload using this modern surgical system in comparison to the Conventional microscope system remains unexplored. We evaluate the surgeon’s cognitive workload and the surgical outcomes of macular hole(MH) surgery performed on a 3D versus a Conventional microscope operating system. Methods 50 eyes of 50 patients with MH undergoing surgery using the 3D or Conventional microscope visualization system. Cognitive workload assessment was done by real-time tools(Surgeons’ heart rate [HR] and oxygen saturation[SPO2]) and self-report tool(Surgery Task Load Index[SURG-TLX] questionnaire) of three Vitreoretinal surgeons. Based on the SURG-TLX questionnaire, an assessment of the workload was performed. Results Of the 50 eyes, 30 eyes and 20 eyes underwent surgery with the Conventional microscope and the 3D system, respectively. No difference was noted in the MH basal-diameter(p = 0.128), total surgical-duration(p = 0.299), internal-limiting membrane(ILM) peel time(p = 0.682), and the final visual acuity (VA; p = 0.515) between the two groups. Both groups showed significant improvement in VA(p < 0.001) with a 90% closure rate at one-month post-surgery. Cognitive workload comparison, the intraoperative HR(p = 0.024), total workload score(P = 0.005), and temporal-demand dimension(p = 0.004) were significantly more in Conventional microscope group as compared to 3D group. In both the groups, the HR increased significantly from the baseline while performing ILM peeling and at the end. Conclusion The surgeon’s cognitive workload is markedly reduced while performing macular hole surgery with a 3D viewing system. Moreover, duration of surgery including ILM peel time, MH closure rates, and visual outcomes remains unaffected irrespective of the operating microscope system.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-024-03361-5Macular HoleConventional microscope3D viewing systemCognitive workload
spellingShingle Aditya Kelkar
S. Natarajan
Akshay Kothari
Mounika Bolisetty
Comparison of cognitive workload and surgical outcomes between a three-dimensional and conventional microscope macular hole surgery
BMC Ophthalmology
Macular Hole
Conventional microscope
3D viewing system
Cognitive workload
title Comparison of cognitive workload and surgical outcomes between a three-dimensional and conventional microscope macular hole surgery
title_full Comparison of cognitive workload and surgical outcomes between a three-dimensional and conventional microscope macular hole surgery
title_fullStr Comparison of cognitive workload and surgical outcomes between a three-dimensional and conventional microscope macular hole surgery
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of cognitive workload and surgical outcomes between a three-dimensional and conventional microscope macular hole surgery
title_short Comparison of cognitive workload and surgical outcomes between a three-dimensional and conventional microscope macular hole surgery
title_sort comparison of cognitive workload and surgical outcomes between a three dimensional and conventional microscope macular hole surgery
topic Macular Hole
Conventional microscope
3D viewing system
Cognitive workload
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-024-03361-5
work_keys_str_mv AT adityakelkar comparisonofcognitiveworkloadandsurgicaloutcomesbetweenathreedimensionalandconventionalmicroscopemacularholesurgery
AT snatarajan comparisonofcognitiveworkloadandsurgicaloutcomesbetweenathreedimensionalandconventionalmicroscopemacularholesurgery
AT akshaykothari comparisonofcognitiveworkloadandsurgicaloutcomesbetweenathreedimensionalandconventionalmicroscopemacularholesurgery
AT mounikabolisetty comparisonofcognitiveworkloadandsurgicaloutcomesbetweenathreedimensionalandconventionalmicroscopemacularholesurgery