Ergonomics in Craniofacial Surgery: Can We Do Better? A Quality Improvement Study

Area of Science:

• Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
• Surgical Technology
• Occupational Health

Background:

• Plastic surgeons frequently experience musculoskeletal strain and injury due to poor surgical ergonomics.
• These ergonomic issues can lead to decreased performance, shorter careers, and diminished quality of life for surgeons.
• Optimizing surgical setups is critical for surgeon well-being and sustained practice.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the ergonomic efficiency of the conventional operating table headrest versus the Mayfield headrest during craniofacial surgery.
• To assess the impact of different headrest systems on surgeon posture and strain.
• To identify ergonomic advantages that can mitigate musculoskeletal risks in plastic surgery.

Main Methods:

• A prospective cohort study involving patients undergoing craniofacial operations.
• Data collection included total operation duration and Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) scores for the primary surgeon and assistant.
• Ergonomic assessments were conducted between November 2022 and April 2023.

Main Results:

• The Mayfield headrest group showed significantly lower mean REBA scores (5.01 ± 2.0) compared to the regular headrest group (5.79 ± 1.9; P < 0.0001).
• In the regular headrest group, the primary surgeon had higher REBA scores (5.89 ± 2.0) than the assistant (5.48 ± 1.6).
• Conversely, with the Mayfield headrest, the primary surgeon's REBA scores (4.67 ± 1.8) were lower than the assistant's (5.65 ± 2.15).

Conclusions:

• The Mayfield headrest provides superior ergonomic benefits compared to the conventional operating table headrest in craniofacial surgery.
• The Mayfield system particularly improves ergonomics for the primary surgeon.
• These findings suggest that adopting the Mayfield headrest can help reduce musculoskeletal strain and improve surgeon comfort.