Page 38 - WJOLS

Bashir Yunusa et al

Table 5D: Average timing for surgeon’s knotting in the pelvis
Manipulation angle in degrees 30 60 90
Mean timing in seconds 160.60 116.50 210.55
c 2 23.26 4.08 59.17
will provide working angle of 60º as the ideal. This is shown
in Graph 4.
Fifth: Tables 5A to D showed readings of timing of sur­
geon’s knotting in the pelvic cavity of dummies at diffe rent
2
manipulation angles which were validated by χ tests and
average obtained (Figs 9 and 10). The average timing in
seconds for 30, 60 and 90º were 160.60, 116.50 and 210.55
respectively. Despite the facts that, the first two readings
were reproducible at p-value (30.144), 5% level of signifi­ Graph 5: Average timing of surgeon’s knotting in the pelvis
cance: it has clearly demonstrated that the 60º angle has
shorter operative time than that of 30º. The readings of 90º
angle were nonreproducible for surgeons knotting in the
pelvis indicating increased difficulties and time consump­
tion when ports are positioned in such a way that will give
working angle of 90º and above (Figs 10 and 11).
This is shown in Graph 5.

Graph 6: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy
Table 6A: Timing of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with
approximate 30º manipulation angle
Sl. no Observed Expected O-E (O-E) 2 (O-E) 2
(O) (E) E
1 157 151.50 5.5 30.25 0.20
2 157 5.5 30.25 0.20
Fig. 10: description of ports’ sites on the anterior abdominal wall 3 159 7.5 56.25 0.37
4 157 5.5 30.25 0.20
5 132 – 19.5 380.25 2.51
6 147 – 4.5 20.25 0.13
2
Mean 151.50 c = 3.61
2
p-value > (11.070) c , so data are reproducible
Table 6B: Timing of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with
approximate 60º manipulation angle
Sl. no. Observed Expected (E) O-E (O-E) 2 (O-E) 2
(O) E
1 122 128.50 – 6.5 42.25 0.33
2 121 – 7.5 56.25 0.44
3 136 7.5 56.25 0.44
4 137 8.5 72.25 0.56
5 188 – 10.5 110.25 0.86
6 137 8.5 72.25 0.56
2
Mean in 128.50 c = 3.19
Fig. 11: performing a task with 90° manipulation angle minutes
2
in the pelvis p-value (11.070) > c , so data are reproducible
84