Be the Difference with SQ.line® Orthopaedic Instruments
Reinventing surgical instruments
Discover our new Aesculap SQ.line® range of orthopaedic basic instruments, focusing on easier reprocessing and improved ergonomics for the orthopaedic surgeon.
SQ.line® instruments help improve daily work in the CSSD by providing easier visual inspection, time savings during reprocessing and at the same time, improved safety for staff and patients.
Ergonomic Working
![](/content/dam/b-braun/uk/website/images/products/sgm/sq-surgeon-ergonomic.jpg.transform/650/image.jpg)
ERGONOMIC WORKING
Surgeons’ muscles can be tired after working all day in physically demanding orthopaedic theatres.
We also understand the issue of musculoskeletal pain in surgery (1,2,3,4) and how this can often be underreported (5,6).
Thoroughly tested with surgeons, SQ.line® instruments help address these concerns, they’re proven to provide ergonomic working with reduced pressure points and joint stress. They offer user-friendly weight and balance, improved grip and require less force allowing more comfortable handling.
White Paper download - Ergonomic working in theatre
Why Orthopaedic Surgeons Prefer SQ.Line
WHY ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS PREFER SQ.LINE®
Design makes the difference
Feel the grip
![](/content/dam/b-braun/uk/website/images/products/sgm/DSC0132.png.transform/650/image.jpg)
The unique, award-winning design provides 70% more grip in comparison to previous products due to shape, material, edges and texture.
The result: Less force to achieve a more secure grip during use.
White Paper - Metal handle - a better grip than silicone PDF – Download
White Paper - Handle double action forceps_feel the grip PDF – Download
Feel comfortable
25% less force is needed to cut through wires compared to previous products, as a result of optimised power transmission of the wire cutting forceps.
White Paper - Wire cutting forceps-one step ahead – Download
Fine tuning
Everything in balance
Discover our test results
A cadaver workshop was performed to test the usability and function of SQ.line® instruments. Orthopaedic surgeons simulated different scenarios in hip surgery. Read the results and feedback from 136 customers across 8 countries with their feedback on the ergonomic design compared to other competitors.
Customer Interviews White Paper
INCLUSIVITY
Female surgeons report more difficulty when handling instruments than their male counterparts with research showing that female surgeons need more ergonomic instruments to operate safely and effectively (7,8).
SQ.line®’s user-friendly weight and balance offers smoother handling of the instruments and a more ergonomic design than competitor products.
DISCOMFORT FOR SURGEONS
Orthopaedic surgeons report high levels of musculoskeletal pain from performing surgery. Orthopaedic surgical instruments are attributed to these physical symptoms with surgeons claiming that common instruments are difficult or uncomfortable to use (2,7).
Evidence suggests that occupational musculoskeletal injury can cause missed work days and can have an impact on surgical care for patients whilst surgeons recover from injury (9).
SQ.line® offers ergonomically designed instruments that helps to reduce pressure points and joint stress and require less force during use.
FEEL THE DIFFERENCE. REDESIGNED FOR IMPROVED ERGONOMICS
The SQ.line® instruments allow improved ergonomic working for different hand sizes with reduced pressure points and joint stress. Evidenced benefits also include wire cutters which use 25% less force, and mallets which provide 70% more grip and offer improved weight balance when compared to previous products(11)..
Combining Aesculap quality and functionality with enhanced comfort and performance SQ.line® heralds a new generation of user-centric instrument design.
Why CSSD Prefer SQ.Line
SEE THE DIFFERENCE. WHY CSSD PREFER SQ.LINE®
Easy Reprocessing
Instrument design can add complexity to reprocessing work – instruments with non-observable joints and narrow gaps make inspection difficult and increase cleaning time. Inadequately reprocessed instruments can also lead to rework, delays and increased stress.
SQ.line® instruments require less manual pre-cleaning therefore saving CSSD's time. Careful cleaning of these instruments is now more simple and effective, manual pre-cleaning steps can be eliminated with fully machine-cleanable instruments, resulting in time savings of up to 12 minutes in handling time.
Improved efficiencies in visual inspection is possible with SQ.line® with difficult-to-inspect areas reduced by more than 50%.
Complications in the reprocessing of surgical instruments can also contribute to Surgical Site Infections (SSI) cases (10). 87% of our interviewed customers believe that the SQ.line® design may reduce complexity in CSSD, which could help to reduce the risk of surgical site infections.
White Paper – Challenges in CSSD PDF – Download
Easier visual inspection
>50% reduction in difficult-to-inspect areas means visual inspection is more efficient.
White Paper – Overview customer interviews - SQ.line PDF – Download
*SQ.line bone rongeur was compared with the previous product
Save time
Manual pre-cleaning steps can be eliminated with fully machine-cleanable instruments, resulting in time savings up to 12 minutes in handling time.
White Paper - Double action instruments - easy to clean design PDF – Download
Repair made easy
Lower protein residual
The limit of protein residues is reached at an earlier stage during cleaning and disinfection compared to the current instrument design. Therefore the risk of reprocessing rework is reduced.
White Paper - Double action instruments - Protein test1 PDF – Download
100% stainless steel
Discover our test results
31 CSSDs were interviewed during usability tests of SQ.line®. The results showed that 87% of those asked, believed that the ergonomic SQ.line® design may help to reduce complexity in CSSD, which could reduce the risk of surgical site infections. Take a look at the results here.
Related Documents
References: 1.Aaron (2021), 2.McQuivey (2021), 3.Chambers (2020), 4.Vijendren (2015), 5.Soueid (2010), 6.Davila (2019), 7.Fram (2021), 8.Bellini (2022), 9. Davis et al. (2014), 10. ‘Southworth (2014)’ .