Write your message
Volume 10, Issue 3 (Iranian Journal of Ergonomics 2022)                   Iran J Ergon 2022, 10(3): 172-180 | Back to browse issues page

Ethics code: IR.UMSHA.REC.1397.920

XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Heidarimoghadam R, Mortezapour A, Najafighobadi K, Saeednia H, Mosaferchi S. Investigating the Relationship between Surgeon's Mental Workload and Their Productivity: Validation of "Surgeon-TLX" Tool in Iranian Surgeons.. Iran J Ergon 2022; 10 (3) :172-180
URL: http://journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-914-en.html
1- Department of Ergonomics, School of Public Health, Occupational Health and Safety Research Center, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
2- Department of Ergonomics, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
3- Department of Statistics, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
4- Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Salerno, Via Giovanni Paolo II, 132, 84084 Fisciano, SA, Italy , smosaferchi@unisa.it
Abstract:   (3041 Views)
Objectives: The importance of surgery and its high workload are not hidden from anyone. So far, various studies have been conducted with the NASA-TLX instrument and other commonly used instruments to measure surgeons’ workload. The present study seeks to investigate the relationship between the mental workload of surgeons and their productivity through the validation of specialized tools for this job in Iranian culture.
Methods: After checking the validity and reliability of "SURG-TLX" and productivity tools, they were utilized among 60 surgeons to investigate the relationship between their workload and productivity (WHO-HPQ tool). Content validity indices, Cronbach's alpha coefficient and Spearman's correlation coefficient were used to analyse the results.
Results: Both tools had good validity and reliability in Iranian culture. The results of the relationship between mental workload subscales with different dimensions of productivity showed that some dimensions of mental workload including mental needs (correlation coefficient -0.65 and significance level 0.02), physical needs (correlation coefficient -0.54 and significance level 0.04) and time requirements (correlation coefficient -0.44 and significance level 0.02) had a reverse and significant relationship with the overall productivity score. Despite the reverse relationship between the other dimensions of mental workload and the overall productivity score in surgeons, this relationship was not statistically significant. The results indicated a reverse and significant relationship between some of the mental workload and some of the productivity subscales.
Conclusion: In addition to the possibility of using these tools in the future studies in Iran, due to the direct relationship between workload and productivity in surgeons, measures can be taken to maintain the workload at a standard level and prevent the reduction of their productivity.
Full-Text [PDF 1190 kb]   (1915 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Cognitive Ergonomics
Received: 2022/09/25 | Accepted: 2022/12/22 | ePublished: 2022/12/22

References
1. Catanzarite T, Tan-Kim J, Whitcomb EL, Menefee S. Ergonomics in surgery: a review. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2018;24(1):1-12. [DOI] [PubMed]
2. Zakerian SA, Tarzi Moghaddam S, Toulabi K, Mortezapour Soufiani A, Khanehshenas F, Mosaferchi S. Ergonomics in laparoscopic surgery: A case study in hospitals of Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Iran. J Occup Hyg Eng. 2019;5(4):17-25.
3. Weiser TG, Regenbogen SE, Thompson KD, Haynes AB, Lipsitz SR, Berry WR, et al. An estimation of the global volume of surgery: a modelling strategy based on available data. Lancet. 2008;372(9633):139-44. [DOI] [PubMed]
4. Hallbeck M, Lowndes BR, Bingener J, Abdelrahman A, Yu D, Bartley A, et al. The impact of intraoperative microbreaks with exercises on surgeons: a multi-center cohort study. Appl Ergon. 2017;60:334-41. [DOI] [PubMed]
5. Lowndes BR, Forsyth KL, Blocker RC, Dean PG, Truty MJ, Heller SF, et al. NASA-TLX assessment of surgeon workload variation across specialties. Ann Surg. 2020;271(4):686-92. [DOI] [PubMed]
6. Lehtonen JM, Kujala J, Kouri J, Hippeläinen M. Cardiac surgery productivity and throughput improvements. Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2007;20(1):40-52. [DOI] [PubMed]
7. Austin MT, Diaz Jr JJ, Feurer ID, Miller RS, May AK, Guillamondegui OD, et al. Creating an emergency general surgery service enhances the productivity of trauma surgeons, general surgeons and the hospital. J Trauma. 2005;58(5):906-10. [DOI] [PubMed]
8. Yoon JW, Chen RE, Han PK, Si P, Freeman WD, Pirris SM. Technical feasibility and safety of an intraoperative head‐up display device during spine instrumentation. Int J Med Robot. 2017;13(3):e1770. [DOI] [PubMed]
9. Zheng B, Jiang X, Atkins MS. Detection of changes in surgical difficulty: evidence from pupil responses. Surg Innov. 2015;22(6):629-35. [DOI] [PubMed]
10. Yu D, Lowndes B, Thiels C, Bingener J, Abdelrahman A, Lyons R, et al. Quantifying intraoperative workloads across the surgical team roles: room for better balance? World J Surg. 2016;40(7):1565-74. [DOI] [PubMed]
11. Rieger A, Fenger S, Neubert S, Weippert M, Kreuzfeld S, Stoll R. Psychophysical workload in the operating room: primary surgeon versus assistant. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(7):1990-8. [DOI] [PubMed]
12. Weber J, Catchpole K, Becker AJ, Schlenker B, Weigl M. Effects of flow disruptions on mental workload and surgical performance in robotic-assisted surgery. World J Surg. 2018;42(11):3599-607. [DOI] [PubMed]
13. Riggle JD, Miller EE, McCrory B, Meitl A, Lim E, Hallbeck MS, et al. Ergonomic comparison of laparoscopic hand instruments in a single site surgery simulator with novices. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2015;24(2):68-76. [DOI] [PubMed]
14. Bednarik R, Bartczak P, Vrzakova H, Koskinen J, Elomaa AP, Huotarinen A, et al. Pupil size as an indicator of visual-motor workload and expertise in microsurgical training tasks. Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications; 2018 June.
15. Hart SG, editor NASA-task load index (NASA-TLX); 20 years later. Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting; 2006. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. [DOI]
16. Hart SG, Staveland LE. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Adv Psychol. 1988;52:139-83. [DOI]
17. Noyes JM, Bruneau DP. A self-analysis of the NASA-TLX workload measure. Ergonomics. 2007;50(4):514-9. [DOI] [PubMed]
18. Hernandez R, Roll SC, Jin H, Schneider S, Pyatak EA. Validation of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) Adapted for the whole day repeated measures context. Ergonomics. 2022;65(7):960-75. [DOI] [PubMed]
19. Zheng B, Jiang X, Tien G, Meneghetti A, Panton ONM, Atkins MS. Workload assessment of surgeons: correlation between NASA TLX and blinks. Surg Endosc. 2012;26(10):2746-50. [DOI] [PubMed]
20. Guru KA, Shafiei SB, Khan A, Hussein AA, Sharif M, Esfahani ET. Understanding cognitive performance during robot-assisted surgery. Urology. 2015;86(4):751-7. [DOI] [PubMed]
21. Zakerian SA, Zia G, Nasl Seraji G, Azam K, Mortezapour A. Reliability and validity of the driver activity load index for assessing mental workload among drivers in production companies [in Persian]. JOHE. 2018;5(2):65-71. [DOI]
22. Abdi R, Mazloumi A, Halvani G, Namazi S, Azam K. Development and validation of a pilot activity load index (PALI) based on NASA-TLX template [in Persian]. TKJ. 2020;11(4):72-83. [DOI]
23. Wilson MR, Poolton JM, Malhotra N, Ngo K, Bright E, Masters RS. Development and validation of a surgical workload measure: the surgery task load index (SURG-TLX). World J Surg. 2011;35(9):1961-9. [DOI] [PubMed]
24. Ma J, Lowndes B, Chrouser K, Hallbeck S, McCrory B. Developing a subjective instrument for laparoscopic surgical workload in a high fidelity simulator using the NASA-TLX and SURG-TLX. IISE Trans Healthc Syst Eng. 2021;11(2):161-9. [DOI]
25. Carvalho DPd, Rocha LP, Brum AN, Brum RG, Bordignon SS, Barlem ELD, et al. Relationship between workloads and presenteeism among nursing workers. Rev Bras Enferm. 2021;74(6):e20210044. [DOI] [PubMed]
26. Tavares RdSCR, Silva LF, Muniz Júnior J. Presenteeism and noise perception at work: a cross-sectional study using association analysis. Sao Paulo Med J. 2022;141(1):36-44. [DOI] [PubMed]
27. Kamari Ghanavati F, Choobineh A, Keshavarzi S, Nasihatkon AA, Jafari Roodbandi AS. Assessment of mental workload and its association with work ability in control room operators. Med Lav. 2019;110(5):389-97. [DOI] [PubMed]
28. Abbruzzese K, Valentino AL, Scholl L, Hampp EL, Chen Z, Smith R, et al. Physical and mental demand during total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 2022;53(4):413-9. [DOI] [PubMed]
29. Dunn TJ, Terao MA, Blazin LJ, Spraker-Perlman H, Baker JN, Mandrell B, et al. Associations of job demands and patient safety event involvement on burnout among a multidisciplinary group of pediatric hematology/oncology clinicians. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2021;68(11):e29214. [DOI] [PubMed]
30. Dewa CS, Loong D, Bonato S, Thanh NX, Jacobs P. How does burnout affect physician productivity? A systematic literature review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14(1):325. [DOI] [PubMed]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Iranian Journal of Ergonomics

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb |