Robotic Surgery in Australasian Gynaecology: Results of a 2025 Cross-Sectional Survey.

OA: gold CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0
📄 Open PDF View on PubMed View at publisher

Abstract

BackgroundRobotic-assisted gynaecologic surgery has expanded globally, yet its adoption in Australasia remains variable.AimTo evaluate the current attitudes, practice patterns, and perceived barriers surrounding robotic-assisted gynaecologic surgery among clinicians in Australia and New Zealand (Australasian).Material and methodsA cross-sectional, anonymised electronic survey was distributed to all RANZCOG-certified obstetrician-gynaecologists practicing in Australasian. The survey assessed demographics, access to and use of robotic platforms, perceived advantages and limitations, and willingness to expand robotic practice. Associations between years of clinical experience and access, utilisation, and attitudes toward robotic surgery were analysed.ResultsA total of 276 clinicians responded. Most (62.2%) had more than 10 years of clinical experience. 37.5% reported access to robotic-assisted surgery, and among those, 34% currently performed robotic procedures mostly for < 25% of major operations. Willingness to expand usage remained low even if access improved (42.8%). Ergonomic benefit and surgeon longevity were the most cited advantages, while fewer than half believed robotics improved patient outcomes. Main barriers were high cost, longer operative time, limited evidence of benefit, and scarce training opportunities. Clinicians with ≤ 10 years of experience were more likely than senior colleagues to perceive advantages (68.3% vs. 38.8%) and to express willingness to adopt robotics if given access (56.9% vs. 33.7%).ConclusionsAs of 2025, robotic surgery remains limited in Australasian gynaecology, with adoption shaped by practical concerns, limited evidence, cost, and access. Nevertheless, greater enthusiasm among early-career clinicians suggests future practice may evolve. Ongoing evaluation and evidence-based decision-making will be essential as the field advances.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

SciLite annotations

organisms 1
human

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-09-13T09:25:22.628771+00:00
scilite
last seen: 2026-09-13T09:58:29.948030+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-09-14T06:35:54.356137+00:00
License: CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0