ArticleBMJ open2023
Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial (RACER-knee): a study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Perceptions of robot-assisted arthroplasty among patients and the public : a scoping review.Bone & joint open · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty with MAKO is associated with improved functional outcomes : a systematic review and meta-analysis.Bone & joint open · 2025Pooled it
- What's important for recovery after a total knee replacement? A systematic review of mixed methods studies.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Embodied artificial intelligence in robotic orthopaedic surgery: from intelligent assistance to adaptive surgical autonomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Patient perception of robotic-assisted arthroplasty: how confidence in expected outcomes influences recovery.Annals of joint · 2026Article
- Robotic vs. conventional total knee arthroplasty over two decades: Evolving trends toward personalised alignment without significant clinical superiority in predominantly mild varus deformity-A systematic review of RCTs.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Robotic total hip and knee arthroplasty: economic impact and workflow efficiency.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- Current trends in shoulder arthroplasty - Are the trends backed by evidence?Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025Article
- CT-Based Software-Generated Measurements Permit More Objective Assessments of Arithmetic Hip-Knee-Ankle Axis and Joint Line Obliquity.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Novel Navigation-Assisted Surgery Increases Financial Burden of Patients Suffering Tile Types B and C Pelvic Fractures in China.BioMed research international · 2025Article
- Noisy Robots? Comparison of Occupational Noise Levels Between Robotic-Assisted and Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty.Arthroplasty today · 2024Article
- Advanced technology in shoulder arthroplasty surgery: Artificial intelligence, extended reality, and robotics.Shoulder & elbow · 2024Review
- Pitfalls with the MAKO Robotic-Arm-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- UK robotic arthroplasty clinical and cost effectiveness randomised controlled trial for hips (RACER-Hip): a study protocol.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Robots on the Stage: A Snapshot of the American Robotic Total Knee Arthroplasty Market.JB & JS open accessReview
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRobotic-assisted knee replacement systems have been introduced to healthcare services worldwide in an effort to improve clinical outcomes for people, although high-quality evidence that they are clinically, or cost-effective remains sparse. Robotic-arm systems may improve surgical accuracy and could contribute to reduced pain, improved function and lower overall cost of total knee replacement (TKR) surgery. However, TKR with conventional instruments may be just as effective and may be quicker and cheaper. There is a need for a robust evaluation of this technology, including cost-effectiveness analyses using both within-trial and modelling approaches. This trial will compare robotic-assisted against conventional TKR to provide high-quality evidence on whether robotic-assisted knee replacement is beneficial to patients and cost-effective for healthcare systems. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial-Knee is a multicentre, participant-assessor blinded, randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted TKR compared with TKR using conventional instruments. A total of 332 participants will be randomised (1:1) to provide 90% power for a 12-point difference in the primary outcome measure; the Forgotten Joint Score at 12 months postrandomisation. Allocation concealment will be achieved using computer-based randomisation performed on the day of surgery and methods for blinding will include sham incisions for marker clusters and blinded operation notes. The primary analysis will adhere to the intention-to-treat principle. Results will be reported in line with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. A parallel study will collect data on the learning effects associated with robotic-arm systems. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been approved by an ethics committee for patient participation (East Midlands-Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee, 29 July 2020. NRES number: 20/EM/0159). All results from the study will be disseminated using peer-reviewed publications, presentations at international conferences, lay summaries and social media as appropriate. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN27624068.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.