Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37878075›Full record

ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024

Poor usability of computer-assisted navigation for hip fracture surgery.

Rasmus Abildtrup Hestehave, Per Hviid Gundtoft, Christian Lind Nielsen, Ole Brink, Jan Duedal Rölfing

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Rasmus Abildtrup Hestehave *Department of Orthopaedics, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, J801, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5118-4020
Per Hviid Gundtoft *Department of Orthopaedics, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, J801, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3688-6865
Christian Lind NielsenDepartment of Orthopaedics, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, J801, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3495-661X
Ole BrinkDepartment of Orthopaedics, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, J801, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1956-2970
Jan Duedal RölfingDepartment of Orthopaedics, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, J801, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark. jan.rolfing@rm.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7934-2983

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe STRYKER ADAPT computer-assisted navigation system provides intraoperative feedback to the surgeon regarding implant placement of the Gamma3 nail. The usability of the ADAPT system has not been evaluated. The aim of the study was to investigate the perceived usability of the ADAPT system. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis was a descriptive study with prospectively collected data. ADAPT was introduced at Aarhus University Hospital in February 2021. Prior to introduction, surgeons at the department attended a general introduction to the system. ADAPT was introduced to the surgical nurses and was on display at the surgical ward at more than one occasion, where personal introduction to the system was possible. After introduction, it was mandatory to use ADAPT when using the Gamma3 nail to treat intertrochanteric femur fractures. After each procedure, primary and an eventual supervisor answered a questionnaire, which encompassed the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire. The SUS is a ten-item questionnaire regarding the perceived usability of a system. SUS scores were translated to adjectives, describing user experience on a 7-point adjective scale (worst imaginable, awful, poor, ok, good, excellent, best imaginable). User acceptability, defined as "not acceptable", "marginal" or "acceptable", was also used to interpret the SUS scores.

resultsADAPT was used in 50 procedures by 29 different surgeons, with varying skill-level. Median SUS-score after first-time use of ADAPT for all 29 surgeons was 43 (range: 5-60), which translated to "poor" or "not acceptable". For surgeons who performed ≥ 3 ADAPT-assisted procedures, there were no statistically significant difference in their first to latest SUS-score (median difference: 4.3, p = 0.5). In free text comments ADAPT was positively described as helpful in placement of K-wire and providing educational opportunities for inexperienced surgeons and negatively as inconsistent, slow, time consuming, and causing excessive fluoroscopy.

conclusionsUsability and acceptability of ADAPT was rated as "poor" or "not acceptable" by the majority of operating surgeons. ADAPT has not been used at our institution based on these findings. The System Usability Scale may be used in further research exploring usability and acceptability of novel computer-assisted navigation systems for orthopaedic surgery.

Indexed as

Fracture Fixation, IntramedullaryHip FracturesSurgeonsSurgery, Computer-AssistedBone ScrewsComputersHumansADAPT“Femoral fractures” [Mesh]“Fracture fixation, intramedullary” [Mesh]Gamma3“Hip fractures” [Mesh]Stryker“Surgery, computer-assisted” [Mesh]System usability scaleUsability

Identifiers

PMID37878075
PMCPMC10774189

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.