Hemşirelerin Robotik Kalp Cerrahisi Konusundaki Bilgi Düzeylerinin Belirlenmesi

Year 2025, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 145 - 155, 05.04.2025

Kıymet Öztepe Yeşilyurt , Fikret Karayurt , Ersin Kadirogulları

https://doi.org/10.38108/ouhcd.1361659

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışma, robotik kalp cerrahisi konusunda hemşirelerin bilgi ve algı düzeylerini belirlemek amacıyla yapıldı.
Yöntem: Tanımlayıcı tipte olan araştırma, Temmuz-Eylül 2022 tarihleri arasında İstanbul’da bir Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi’nde görev yapan 280 hemşireyle yürütüldü. Veriler, ‘Kişisel Bilgi Formu’ ve ‘Robotik Kalp Cerrahisi Hemşire Bilgi Düzeyi Anket Formu kullanılarak toplandı. Veri analizinde frekans, yüzde, ortalama ve standart sapma, Shapiro-Wilk, Ki-Kare ve Fisher's exact testleri kullanıldı.
Bulgular: Hemşirelerin yaş ortalaması 30.08±6.88 ve %82.1’i kadındı. Araştırma kapsamında yer alan hemşirelerin %96.4’ünün robotik cerrahi terimini duyduğu, %62.5’inin robotik telecerrahi terimini duymadığı, %67.9’unun robotik kalp cerrahi hemşiresinin görev ve sorumlulukları, %30’unun ise robotik cerrahinin avantaj-dezavantajları hakkında bilgilerinin olmadığı belirlendi. Cerrahi birimlerde çalışan hemşirelerin, robotik kalp cerrahisi hemşiresinin görev-sorumlulukları ve robotik cerrahinin avantajları hakkında bilgili olma oranlarının diğer birimlerde çalışan hemşirelere oranla daha yüksek olduğu bulundu (Ki-kare testi, p<0.01 ve p<0.05). Ayrıca 30 yaş ve altı hemşire grubuna göre 30 yaş üzeri hemşirelerin, robotik tele cerrahi hakkında bilgi sahibi olma oranının anlamlı derecede daha yüksek olduğu saptandı (Ki-kare testi, p=0.03).
Sonuç: Hemşireler robotik cerrahi uygulamalarına ilişkin bilgi sahibi olmakla birlikte, hemşirelerin robotik kalp cerrahisinde görev alan hemşirelerin rol ve sorumlulukları hakkındaki bilgilerinin sınırlı olduğu görülmektedir. Bu yönde alandaki teknolojik gelişmeleri takip eden yeni çalışmaların yapılması önerilmektedir.

Keywords

robotik cerrahi işlemler, kalp cerrahisi, cerrahi hemşireliği

Determination of Nurses' Knowledge Levels on Robotic Cardiac Surgery

Abstract

Objective: This study was conducted to determine nurses’ knowledge and perception levels about robotic cardiac surgery.
Methods: The descriptive study was conducted with 280 nurses working in a Training and Research Hospital in Istanbul between July and September 2022. The study data were collected using the 'Personal Information Form' and 'Robotic Cardiac Surgery Nurse Knowledge Level Questionnaire'. Frequency, percentage, mean and standard deviation, Shapiro-Wilk, Chi-Square and Fisher's exact tests were used in data analysis.
Results: The mean age of the nurses included in the study was 30.08±6.88 years and 82.1% were female. It was determined that 96.4% of the nurses had heard the term robotic surgery, 62.5% had not heard the term robotic telesurgery, 67.9% had no information about the duties and responsibilities of robotic cardiac surgery nurses and 30% had no information about the advantages and disadvantages of robotic surgery. Nurses working in surgical units were found to be more knowledgeable about the duties and responsibilities of robotic cardiac surgery nurses and the advantages of robotic surgery compared to nurses working in other units (Chi-square test, p<0.01 and p<0.05). In addition, it was found that nurses over 30 years of age had a significantly higher rate of knowledge about robotic telesurgery compared to the group of nurses aged 30 years and younger (Chi-square test, p=0.03).
Conclusion: Although nurses are knowledgeable about robotic surgery applications, their knowledge about the roles and responsibilities of nurses involved in robotic cardiac surgery is limited. It is recommended that new studies be conducted in this direction, following technological developments in the field.

Keywords

robotic surgery procedures, heart surgery, surgical nursing

References

• Ak G, Gürsoy B, Yenidünya F, Yıldırım M, Çatal E. (2017). Investigation of knowledges, attitudes and behaviors of nurses and nursing students in different generations about robotic surgery. IMCOFE, Rome, Italy. https://www.imcofe.org/5imcofe/sayfa/tam-metin-kitaplari/15.
• Albuz B, Şahinoğlu D, Egemen E. (2022). Nöroşirürjide egzoskop ve robotik cerrahi uygulamaları. Türk Nöroşirürji Dergisi, 32(2), 210-215.
• Aslan M. (2022). Transoral robotik cerrahi. In A. Uçar, E. Özdemir, M. Aslan (Eds.). Sağlıkta Güncel Gelişmeler Işığında Teorik ve Klinik Yaklaşımlar III. Bursa: Ekin Yayınevi, p. 30-45.
• Benham E, Richardson W, Dort J, Lin H, Tummers AM, Walker TM, Stefanidis D. (2017). What is the value of the SAGES/ AORN MIS checklist? A multi‐institutional practical assessment. Surgical Endoscopy, 31, 1821–1827. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00464-016-5179-0
• Bjøro B, Mykkeltveit I, Rustøen T, Altinbas B, Røyise O, Bentsen S. (2019). Intraopertive peripheral nerve injury related to litotomy positioning with seep Trendelenburg in patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery – a systematic review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 76, 490–503. https://doi.org/10.1111/journal/ jan.
• Bjøro B, Ballestad I, Rustøen T, Fosmark MH, Bentsen SB. (2023). Positioning patients for robotic-assisted surgery: A qualitative study of operating room nurses' experiences. Nursing Open, 10(2), 469-478. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1312.
• Cepolina F, Razzoli RP. (2022). An introductory review of robotically assisted surgical systems. International Journal Medical Robotics, 18(4), 2409. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2409.
• Çam O, Kaçmaz E. (2018). Tele sağlık uygulamaları ve psikiyatri hemşireliğinde kullanımı. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Nursing Sciences, 10(4), 363-9.
• Çelik S. (2011). The role of a nurse in robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery. Yeni Tıp Dergisi, 28(2), 83-86. Erdoğan H, Tokal Ö. (2023). Robotik cerrahide ameliyathane hemşireliği. Elif Kİ, Editör. Sağlık & Bilim, Hemşirelik-IV. İstanbul: Efeakademi Yayınları, s.33.
• Feizi N, Tavakoli M, Patel RV, Atashzar F. (2021). Robotics and ai for teleoperation, tele-assessment, and tele-training for surgery in the era of COVID-19: Existing challenges, and future vision. Front Robot AI, 14(8), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021 .610677
• Fischer GS, Hoffman AH. (2010). Perceptions of surgical robotics. Retrieved from: https://web.wpi.edu/ Pubs/E-project/Available/E-project-042710- 145052/unrestricted/PERCEPTIONS_OF_SURGICAL_ROBOTICS.pdf on 26 June 2022
• Hsu RL, Kaye AD, Urman RD. (2013). Anesthetic challenges in robotic-assisted urologic surgery. Revista Urology, 15(4), 178‐184.
• İnce ME, Ors N, Özkan G, Kadan M, Erol G, Doğancı S ve ark. (2020). Robotik kalp cerrahisinde anestezi yönetimi: Klinik deneyimlerimiz. JARSS, 28(2), 93-9.
• Kahn E, Marca F, Mazzola CA. ( 2016). Neurosurgery and telemedicine in the United States of America: Assessment of the risks and opportunities. World Neurosurgical, 89, 133-138.
• Kang MJ, De Gagne JC, Kang HS. (2016). Perioperative nurses’ work experience with robotic surgery a focus group study. Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 34(4), 152-158. https://doi.org/10.1097/CIN.0000000000000224
• Kaye AD, Vadivelu N, Ahuja N, Mitra S, Silasi D, Urman RD. (2013). Anesthetic considerations in roboticassisted gynecologic surgery. Ochsner Journal, 13(4), 517‐524.
• Kılınç Akman E, Balcı F, Kanan N. (2022). The Importance of using the second safe surgical checklist to robot-assisted surgery (the second “time-out”). Fenerbahce University Journal of Health Sciences, 2(2), 539-547. https://doi.org/10.56061/fbujohs.1141 442
• Lawrence C. (2022). The Role of the robotics coordinator: Improving efficiency in a robotic surgery program. AORN, 115(3), 239-249. http://doi.org/ 10.1002/aorn.13625
• Markar SR, Kolic I, Karthikesalingam AP, Wagner O, Hagen ME. (2012). International survey study of attitudes towards robotic surgery. Journal of Robotic Surgery, 6(3), 231-235. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11701-011-0301-8
• Moss E, Murphy DA, Halkos M. (2014). Robotic cardiac surgery: Current status and future directions. Robotic Surgery: Research and Reviews, 1, 27-36.
• Myklebust MV, Storheim H, Hartvik M, Dysvik E. (2020). Anesthesia Professionals' perspectives of teamwork during robotic-assisted surgery. AORN Journal, 111(1), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1002/ aorn.12897
• Neville CW. (2018). Telehealth: A balanced look at incorporating this technology into practice. SAGE Open Nurs, 23(4), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1177/2377 960818786504
• Okgün Alcan A, Soyer Ö, Giersbergen MY, Solak M, Yoltay HE. (2019). Hemşirelerin robotik cerrahi konusundaki görüşleri. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(1), 5-9.
• Özkan S, Salık Asar A. (2022). Cerrahi hemşireliğinde tele sağlık uygulamaları. Ege Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Dergisi, 38(1), 43-48. https://doi.org/ 10.53490/egehemsire.777580.
• Öztepe Yeşilyurt K, Özsoy Durmaz M. (2023). Knowledge levels of nursing students about robotic surgery and robotic surgery nursing. Kırşehir Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(1), 28-39.
• Poffo R, Toschi AP, Pope RB, Celullare AL, Benício A, Fischer CH ve ark. (2013). Robotic surgery in cardiology: A safe and effective procedure. Einstein (Sao Paulo), 11(3), 296-302. https://doi.org/10.1590 /s1679-45082013000300007
• Porto CST, Çatal E. (2021). A comparative study of the opinions, experiences and individual innovativeness characteristics of operating room nurses on robotic surgery. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 77(12), 4755-4767.
• Raheem AA, Song HJ, Chang KD, Choi YD, Rha KH. (2017). Robotic nurse duties in the urology operative room: 11 years of experience. AJUR, 4, 116-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2016.09.012
• Rothrock JC, McEwen DR. (2019). Alexander's care of the patient in surgery (16th ed.). Elsevier.
• Schuessler Z, Stiles AS, Mancuso P. (2020). Perceptions and experiences of perioperative nurses and nurse anaesthetists in robotic‐assisted surgery. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 29, 60–74.
• Shahzad N, Chawla T, Gala T. (2019). Telesurgery prospects in delivering healthcare in remote areas. Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, 69 (1), 69-71.
• Sutherland J, Fischer GS. (2011). Perceptions of surgical robotics. Analysis and study design. Date of access: 10.08.2023. Retrieved from: https://web.wpi.edu /Pubs/E-project/Available/E-project-031411-210101 /unrestricted/Perceptions _of_Surgical_Robotics.pdf. in 26 June 2022.
• Tasoudis PT, Caranasos TG, Doulamis IP. (2022). Robotic applications for intracardiac and endovascular procedures. Trends Cardiovascular Medicine,20,1050-1738(22)00127-X. https://doi.org/10.1016 /j.tcm.2022.10.002
• Uslu Y, Altınbaş Y, Özercan T, Van Giersbergen MY. (2019). The process of nurse adaptation to robotic surgery: A qualitative study. The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery, 15, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1996.5
• Yavuz Karamanoğlu A, Demir Korkmaz F. (2013). Robotik kalp cerrahisi uygulamalarında hemşirenin sorumlulukları. Türkiye Klinikleri Journal of Nursing Science, 5(2), 105-114.
• Yavuz Karamanoğlu A. (2022). Telecerrahi ve hemşirenin sorumlulukları. EJONS International Journal, 6(21), 328-338.