Nursing care recommendations for robotic cancer surgeries: scoping review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5327/Z1414-4425202100040009Keywords:
Robotic surgical procedures, Nursing care, Oncology nursing, Perioperative nursingAbstract
Objective: To identify and map perioperative nursing care for patients submitted to robotic cancer surgeries. Method: This is a scoping review based on recommendations from the Joanna Briggs Institute, held between October and December 2020 in the following databases: Virtual Health Library (VHL), Cumulative Index to Nursing and
Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), National Library of Medicine (PubMed), and Scopus. The study time frame spans from 2010 to 2020. Results: We identified 84 publications
and included eight in the sample. The results indicated the importance of preoperative nursing evaluation and clarification of surgery side effects. Recommendations for the
intraoperative period included recording the nursing process, preventing perioperative hypothermia and positioning injuries, as well as continuing education for the team. The
findings evidenced the role of nursing in pelvic floor dysfunctions and in identifying deficits in self-care and sexuality, especially in the postoperative period of patients submitted
to prostatectomies. Conclusions: The recommendations identified can minimize the negative impacts of cancer surgeries and, consequently, improve perioperative nursing care.
Keywords: Robotic surgical procedures. Nursing care. Oncology nursing. Perioperative nursing.
References
Carvalho TP. Tratamento Cirúrgico do Câncer e Qualidade de Vida. In: Kalinke LP, Marcondes L, editors. Qualidade de Vida em Oncologia. Campo Grande: Life Editora; 2019. p. 79-89.
Bozec A, Schultz P, Gal J, Chamorey E, Chateau Y, Dassonville O et al. Evolution and predictive factors of quality of life in patients undergoing oncologic surgery for head and neck cancer: A prospective multicentric study. Surgical Oncology. 2019;28(2019):236-242. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suronc.2019.01.012.
Wyld L, Audisio RA, Poston GJ. The evolution of cancer surgery and future perspectives. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2015;12(2):115-124. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.191.
Doyle-Lindrud S. Use of Robotics in Oncology Surgery. CJON. 2015;19(3):265-266. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1188/15.CJON.265-266.
Lanfranco AR, Castellanos AE, Desai JP; Meyers WC. Robotic Surgery: A Current Perspective. Annals of Surgery. 2004;239(1):14-21. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000103020.19595.7d.
Cusano A, Haddock P, Jackson M, Staff I, Wagner J, Meraney A. A comparison of preliminary oncologic outcome and postoperative complications between patients undergoing either open or robotic radical cystectomy. International Braz J Urol. 2016;42(4):663-670. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0393.
Kim HJ, Choi GS, Park JS, Park SY, Yang CS, Lee HJ. The impact of robotic surgery on quality of life, urinary and sexual function following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis with laparoscopic surgery. Colorectal Disease. 2018;20(5):103-113. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.14051.
Pitassi C, Gonçalves AA, Barbosa JGP, Martins CHFA. The Diffusion of Robotic Surgery in Health Public Organizations: The Case of the National Cancer Institute of Brazil (INCA). Administração Pública e Gestão Social. 2016;1(3):187-197. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.21118/apgs.v1i3.1037.
Martins RC, Trevilato DD, Jost MT, Caregnato RCA. Nursing performance in robotic surgeries: integrative review. Rev Bras Enferm [Internet]. 2019;72(3):832-838. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0034-7167-2018-0426.
Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, Mcinerney P et al. Chapter 11: Scoping Reviews (2020 version). In: Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis, JBI, 2020.
Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping Studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005;8(1):19-32. Available from: https://www.york.ac.uk/inst/spru/pubs/pdf/Scopingstudies.pdf.
Stillwell SB, Fineout-Overholt E, Melnyk BM, Williamson KM. Evidence-based pratice Step by Step. Am J Nurs. 2010;110(5):41-47. Available from: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000372071.24134.7e.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):1-6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
Wang C, Song Z, Li S, Tai S. Wang, C.; Song, Z.; Li, S.; Tai, S. Extended nursing for the recovery of urinary functions and quality of life after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2018;26(5):1553-1560. Available from: 10.1007/s00520-017-3988-x.
Sayılan AA, Özbaş A. The Effect of Pelvic Floor Muscle Training On Incontinence Problems After Radical Prostatectomy. American Journal of Men’s Health. 2018;12(4):1007-1015. Available from: 10.1177/1557988318757242.
Johansson VR, Von Vogelsang AC. Patient-reported extremity symptoms after robot-assisted laparoscopic cystectomy. J Clin Nurs. 2019;28(9):1708-1718. Available from: 10.1111/jocn.14781.
Dowrick AS, Wootten AC, Botti M. Does partnership status affect the quality of life of men having robotic- assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for localised prostate cancer? Applied Nursing Research. 2018;42(2018):51-55. Available from: 10.1016/j.apnr.2018.06.008.
Luo J, Zhou L, Lin S, Wenchan Y, Huang L, Liang S. Beneficial effect of fluid warming in elderly patients with bladder cancer undergoing Da Vinci robotic- assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy. Clinics. 2020;75(8):1-6. Available from: 10.6061/clinics/2020/e1639.
Waller J, Pattison N. Men’s experiences of regaining urinary continence following robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) for localised prostate cancer: a qualitative phenomenological study. J Clin Nurs. 2013;22(3-4):368-378. Available from: 10.1111/jocn.12082.
Angelo CDS, Silva EAL, Souza A, Bonfim IM, Joaquim EHG, Apezzato MLP. Surgical Positioning in Pediatric Robotic Surgery: experience report. Rev. SOBECC. 2017;22(3):152-160. Available from: 10.5327/z1414-4425202000020009.
Mangham M. Positioning of the anaesthetised patient during robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery: perioperative staff experiences. Journal of Perioperative Practice. 2016;26(3):50-52. Available from: 10.1177/175045891602600305.
Perez RE, Schwaitzberg SD. Robotic surgery: finding value in 2019 and beyond. Ann Laparosc Endosc Surg. 2019;4(3):1-7. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/ales.2019.05.02.
Amorim KPCA, Garrafa V, Melo AD, Costa AVB, Oliveira GCL, Lopes HG et al. Participantes de Ensaios Clínicos em Oncologia: Perfil e aspectos envolvidos nas suas decisões. Trab. Educ. Saúde. 2018;16(3):1381-1402. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1981-7746-sol00139.
Intuitive Surgical. Annual Report 2019. California; 2020. Available from: https://www.annualreports.com/HostedData/AnnualReports/PDF/NASDAQ_ISRG_2019.pdf.
Rai BP, Bondad J, Vasdev N, Adshead J, Lane T, Ahmed K et al. Robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer in adults (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;2019(4):1-40. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011903.pub2.
Rosenberg JE, Jung JH, Edgerton Z, Lee H, Lee S, Bakker CJ et al. Retzius-sparing versus standard robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;2020(8):1-46. Available from: 10.1002/14651858.CD013641.pub2.
Cianci S, Rosati A, Rumolo V, Alletti SG, Gallotta V, Turco LC et al. Robotic Single-Port Platform in General, Urologic, and Gynecologic Surgeries: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-analysis. World J Surg. 2019;43(10):2401–2419. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-019-05049-0.
Yates DR, Vaessen C, Roupret M. From Leonardo to da Vinci: The history of robot-assisted surgery in urology. BJU International. 2011;108(11):1708–1713. Available from: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10576,10600.x.
Neiva RO, Nogueira MC, Pereira AJ. Preoperative nursing consultation and self-care of cancer patients with respiratory ostomy. ESTIMA, Braz. J. Enterostomal Ther. 2020;18(e2920):1–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.30886/estima.v18.914_PT.
Silva MLC. A Importância da Consulta de Enfermagem para o Cliente no Pré-Operatório de Cirurgias Eletivas. [dissertation]. Departamento de Enfermagem: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina; 2014.
Breda LFTF. Influência da consulta pré-operatória de enfermagem na satisfação das necessidades informativas do doente. [dissertation]. Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Coimbra; 2019.
Sousa CS, Bispo DM, Acunã AA. Development of a handbook of surgical positioning: experience report. Rev. SOBECC. 2018;23(3):169-175. Available from: 10.5327/z1414-4425201800030009.
Giuliano KK, Hendricks J. Inadvertent Perioperative Hypothermia: Current Nursing Knowledge. AORN Journal. 2017;105(5):453-463. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aorn.2017.03.003.
Campbell G, Alderson P, Smith AF, Warttig S. Warming of intravenous and irrigation fluids for preventing inadvertent perioperative hypothermia (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;2015(4):1–64. Available from: 10.1002/14651858.CD009891.pub2.
Iqbal H, Gray M, Gowrie-Mohan S. Anestesia para Cirurgia Urológica Auxiliada por Robô. São Paulo; 2019. Available from: https://www.sbahq.org/resources/pdf/atotw/408.pdf.
Burlingame BL. Guideline Implementation: Positioning the Patient. AORN Journal. 2017;106(3):227–237. Available from: 10.1016/j.aorn.2017.07.010.
Cunningham S, Chellali A, Jaffre I, Classe J, Cao CGL. Effects of Experience and Workplace Culture in Human-Robot Team Interaction in Robotic Surgery: A Case Study. Int J of Soc Robotics. 2013;5(1):75–88. Available from: 10.1007/s12369-012-0170-y.
Lopes CMM, Haas VJ, Dantas RAS, Oliveira CG, Galvão CM. Assessment scale of risk for surgical positioning injuries. Rev. Latino-Am. Enfermagem. 2016;24(e2704):1-8. Available from: 10.1590/1518-8345.0644.2704.
Kraft SJ, Lowndes BR, Hallbeck MS. Defining Best Practices for Patient Safety in Positioning and Transferring Patients with the Surgical Spine Table. Orthopaedic Nursing. 2020;39(1):7–20. Available from: 10.1097/NOR.0000000000000622.
Azevedo AO, Guedes ES, Araújo SAN, Maia MM, Cruz DALM. Documentation of the nursing process in public health institutions. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2019;53(e03471):1-8. Available from: 10.1590/s1980-220x2018003703471.
Tostes MFP, Galvão CM. Surgical safety checklist: benefits, facilitators, and barriers in the nurses’ perspective. Rev Gaúcha Enferm. 2019;40(e20180180):1-11. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1590/1983- 1447.2019.20180180.
Li X, Zhang H, Jia Z, Wang Y, Song Y, Liao L et al. Urinary continence outcomes of four years of follow-up and predictors of early and late urinary continence in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. BMC Urology. 2020;20(29):1-10. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-020-00601-w.
Gröndahl W, Muurinen H, Katajisto J, Suhonen R, Leino-Kilpi H. Perceived quality of nursing care and patient education: A cross-sectional study of hospitalised surgical patients in Finland. BMJ Open. 2019;9(4):1-9. Available from: 10.1136/ bmjopen-2018-023108.
Berke C, Conley MJ, Netsch D, Franklin L, Goodman E, Shepard C et al. Role of the Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurse in Continence Care: 2018 Update. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2019;46(3):221-225. Available from: 10.1097/WON.0000000000000529.
Gomes CRG, Eduardo AHA, Mosteiro-Diaz MP, Pérez-Paniagua J, Napoleão AA. Nursing interventions for urinary incontinence and sexual dysfunction after radical prostatectomy. Acta Paul Enferm. 2019;32(1):106–112. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1982- 0194201900015.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Mariana Nunes da Silva, Andressa Blitzkow Scherer, Ana Carolina de Oliveira Makiyama, Dhebora Luiza Zollner Sary, Fernanda Moura D’Almeida Miranda, Luciana Puchalski Kalinke
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
By publishing in Revista SOBECC, authors retain the copyright of their article and agree to license their work using a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) International Public License, thus accepting the terms of this license. The CC BY 4.0 license allows others to distribute, remix, adapt, and create from the published article, even for commercial purposes, provided they give due credit to the creators of the work (authors of the article).
The authors grant to Revista SOBECC the right of first publication, to identify itself as the original publisher, and grant to the journal a non-exclusive license to use the work in the following ways: (1) to sell and/or distribute the article in hard copies and/or in electronic format; (2) to distribute parts and/or the entire article in order to promote the journal through the internet and other digital and printed media; (3) to record and reproduce the article in any format, including digital media.
With this license, authors can enter into separate contracts for non-exclusive distribution of the article (e.g., publishing in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgement of authorship and initial publication in Revista SOBECC. Authors are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online after publication in the Revista SOBECC, as this can increase the article's visibility and impact.
In line with the journal's policies, each published article will be assigned a CC BY 4.0 license, which will be visible on the abstract page and in the PDF of each article with the respective link to the license terms.
