Nurses’ experiences of participating in robotic surgery：a qualitative meta-synthesis

doi:10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2022.16.013

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective To systematically review and synthesize the experience of nurses participating in robotic surgery，so as to provide recommendations for clinical practice. Methods The computer retrieval was performed in PubMed，CINAHL（EBSCO），Embase，Web of Science，Scopus，ProQuest Dissertations and Theses，SinoMed，CNKI，Wanfang Data and VIP database from January 1，2000 to November 26，2021，to collect qualitative studies in the experience of nurses participating in robotic surgery. This qualitative systematic review was conducted under the Joanna Briggs Institute guideline. This paper was written according to the enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research（ENTREQ）. Results A total of 6 qualitative studies were included，and 39 findings were extracted，which were summarized into 8 categories and integrated into 3 synthesized findings. Findings included that nurses play a coordinating role in teamwork and gain a sense of achievement;nurses face multiple challenges and pressures in their work;nurses lack professional knowledge and need technical support and team training. Conclusion The communication and cooperation among members of the robotic surgical team should be strengthened;the management of operation time，operating room space，equipment failure and patient safety should be strengthened;the operation process should be standardized;the legal responsibilities of nurses should be clarified;professional team training and technical support should be provided for nurses.

Key words: Nurses, Robotic Surgery, Qualitative Study, Systematic Review, Meta-Synthesis

摘要： 目的系统评价和整合护士配合机器人手术的体验，为临床实践提供建议。方法计算机检索PubMed、CINAHL（EBSCO）、Embase、Web of Science、Scopus、ProQuest Dissertations and Theses、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国知网、万方数据库、维普数据库等中英文数据库，搜集有关护士配合机器人手术体验的质性研究，检索时限为2000年1月1日—2021年11月26日。采用澳大利亚乔安娜布里格斯研究所质性研究质量评价标准（2020版）对纳入文献进行方法学质量评价，采用汇集性整合方法对原始研究结果进行整合，按照提高定性研究合成报告透明度的指南撰写论文。结果共纳入6篇质性研究，提取出39个原始研究结果，归纳为8个类别，综合为3个整合结果，分别为护士在团队合作中起到协调作用并获得成就感;护士在工作中面临多重挑战和压力;护士缺乏专业知识，需要团队培训和技术支持。结论应加强机器人手术团队成员的沟通合作，加强对手术时间、空间、设备故障和患者安全的管理，规范手术流程并明确护士的法律责任，为护士提供专业的团队培训和技术支持。

关键词: 护士, 机器人手术, 质性研究, 系统评价, Meta整合

YANG Wantong, ZHANG Qiuwen, MU Li, LI Xuesong, WANG Jing, PANG Dong. Nurses’ experiences of participating in robotic surgery：a qualitative meta-synthesis[J]. Chinese Journal of Nursing, 2022, 57(16): 2003-2009.

杨万通, 张秋雯, 穆莉, 李学松, 王静, 庞冬. 护士配合机器人手术体验质性研究的Meta整合[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2022, 57(16): 2003-2009.

Figures/Tables 5

Table 1 PubMed search strategy

Figure 1 Literature screening process

Table 2 The basic characteristics of the included literature（n=6）

Table 3 Methodological quality evaluation of the included literature（n=6）

Table 4 ConQual summary of findings

References 25

[1]	Oleynikov D. Robotic surgery[J]. Surg Clin North Am, 2008, 88(5):1121-1130.
[2]	唐鲁, 李晓芳, 朱国雄, 等. 达芬奇机器人手术与传统腔镜手术护理配合的比较与启示[J]. 中国实用护理杂志, 2016, 32(14):1115-1117.
	Tang L, Li XF, Zhu GX, et al. Comparison of the operative cooperation of da Vinci robotic surgery and traditional laparoscopic surgery[J]. Chin J Prac Nurs, 2016, 32(14):1115-1117.
[3]	李雪静. 机器人手术系统的发展及护理管理策略[J]. 护理学杂志, 2016, 31(4):108-112.
	Li XJ. The development of robot-assisted surgery systems:nurs-ing management strategies[J]. J Nurs Sci, 2016, 31(4):108-112.
[4]	Lockwood C, Porrit K, Munn Z, et al. Chapter 2:systematic reviews of qualitative evidence[EB/OL].( 2021-04-28)[2021-11-26]. https://synthesismanual.jbi.global.
[5]	Tong A, Flemming K, Mcinnes E, et al. Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research:ENTREQ[J]. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2012, 12:181.
[6]	Munn Z, Porritt K, Lockwood C, et al. Establishing confidence in the output of qualitative research synthesis:the ConQual approach[J]. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2014, 14:108.
[7]	Kang MJ, De Gagne JC, Kang HS. Perioperative nurses’ work experience with robotic surgery:a focus group study[J]. Comput Inform Nurs, 2016, 34(4):152-158.
[8]	Randell R, Honey S, Alvarado N, et al. Factors supporting and constraining the implementation of robot-assisted surgery:a realist interview study[J]. BMJ Open, 2019, 9(6):e028635.
[9]	Uslu Y, Altınbaş Y, Özercan T, et al. The process of nurse adap-tation to robotic surgery:a qualitative study[J]. Int J Med Robot, 2019, 15(4): e1996.
[10]	Schuessler Z, Scott Stiles A, Mancuso P. Perceptions and experiences of perioperative nurses and nurse anaesthetists in robotic-assisted surgery[J]. J Clin Nurs, 2020, 29(1/2):60-74.
[11]	Myklebust MV, Storheim H, Hartvik M, et al. Anesthesia professionals’ perspectives of teamwork during robotic-assisted surgery[J]. Aorn J, 2020, 111(1):87-96.
[12]	曾玉, 章志伟, 江飞虹, 等. 机器人手术护理风险体验的质性研究[J]. 全科护理, 2020, 18(34):4818-4822.
	Zeng Y, Zhang ZW, Jiang FH, et al. Qualitative research on nursing risk experience of robotic surgery[J]. Chin Gen Pract Nurs, 2020, 18(34):4818-4822.
[13]	Sexton K, Johnson A, Gotsch A, et al. Anticipation,teamwork and cognitive load:chasing efficiency during robot-assisted surgery[J]. BMJ Qual Saf, 2018, 27(2):148-154.
[14]	Bonatti J, Schachner T, Bonaros N, et al. How to improve performance of robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting[J]. Am J Surg, 2008, 195 (5):711-716.
[15]	Schiff L, Tsafrir Z, Aoun J, et al. Quality of communication in robotic surgery and surgical outcomes[J]. JSLS, 2016, 20(3): e2016.
[16]	Randell R, Alvarado N, Honey S, et al. Impact of robotic sur-gery on decision making:perspectives of surgical teams[J]. AMIA Annu Symp Proc, 2015, 2015:1057-1066.
[17]	钱文静, 钱蒨健. 1例行机器人前正中入路肝尾状叶肿瘤切除术患者的术中护理[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2014, 49(2):178-180.
	Qian WJ, Qian QJ. Intraoperative care of a patient undergoing robotic anterior hepatic transection for caudate lobectomy[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2014, 49(2):178-180.
[18]	喻晓芬, 王知非, 洪敏. 达芬奇机器人手术系统的手术配合[J]. 中国微创外科杂志, 2015, 15(6):570-573.
	Yu XF, Wang ZF, Hong M. Operation coordination for the Da Vinci robot surgical system[J]. Chin J Min Inv Surg, 2015, 15(6):570-573.
[19]	刘兆礼, 仲蓓, 赵资文, 等. 达芬奇机器人手术与腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术的对比研究[J]. 中华普通外科杂志, 2020, 35(2):100-103.
	Liu ZL, Zhong B, Zhao ZW, et al. A comparative study on Da Vince robotic and laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer[J]. Chin J Gen Surg, 2020, 35(2):100-103.
[20]	朱勤春, 韦烨. 机器人手术配合与故障处理[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2016, 36(11):1241-1242.
	Zhu QC, Wei Y. Cooperation and mechanical failure handle in robotic surgery[J]. Chin J Pract Surg, 2016, 36(11):1241-1242.
[21]	申培培, 张琼, 吕雪青, 等. 达芬奇手术机器人术中故障发生原因及改进措施[J]. 护理学杂志, 2017, 32(12):50-51.
	Shen PP, Zhang Q, Lü XQ, et al. Failure and malfunction of the Da Vinci surgical systems during robotic surgeries:causes and countermeasures[J]. J Nurs Sci, 2017, 32(12):50-51.
[22]	Mills JT, Burris MB, Warburton DJ, et al. Positioning injuries associated with robotic assisted urological surgery[J]. J Urol, 2013, 190(2):580-584.
[23]	Herron DM, Marohn M. A consensus document on robotic sur-gery[J]. Surg Endosc, 2008, 22(2):313-325.
[24]	喻晓芬, 王知非. 医护团队仿真模拟配合机器人手术的方法及效果[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2016, 51(8):943-946.
	Yu XF, Wang ZF. The methods and effects of simulation train-ing of working team in robotic surgery[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2016, 51(8):943-946.
[25]	The Joanna Briggs Institute Levels of Evidence and Grades of Recommendation Working Party. Supporting document for the Joanna Briggs Institute levels of evidence and grades of recommendation[EB/OL].(2014-01)[2021-11-26].https://jbi.global/jbi-search?q=Level+of+evidence]gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=Level%20of%20evidence&gsc.page=1.