ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2024
Feasibility and Usability of Augmented Reality Technology in the Orthopaedic Operating Room.
Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Markerless augmented reality registration for surgical guidance: a multi-anatomy clinical accuracy study.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026Article
- Do patients trust the tech? Exploring perception, confidence, and knowledge of innovations in shoulder arthroplasty.JSES international · 2026Article
- Computer vision syndrome: a comprehensive literature review.Future science OA · 2025Review
- Physicians' Perceptions of AI and Extended Reality in Telemedicine: A Multi-Specialty Cross-Sectional Survey in Romania.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence and multimodal imaging in orthopaedics: from technological advances to clinical translation.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Integrating Augmented Reality in Spine Surgery: Redefining Precision with New Technologies.Brain sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewAugmented reality (AR) has gained popularity in various sectors, including gaming, entertainment, and healthcare. The desire for improved surgical navigation within orthopaedic surgery has led to the evaluation of the feasibility and usability of AR in the operating room (OR). However, the safe and effective use of AR technology in the OR necessitates a proper understanding of its capabilities and limitations. This review aims to describe the fundamental elements of AR, highlight limitations for use within the field of orthopaedic surgery, and discuss potential areas for development. RECENT
findingsTo date, studies have demonstrated evidence that AR technology can be used to enhance navigation and performance in orthopaedic procedures. General hardware and software limitations of the technology include the registration process, ergonomics, and battery life. Other limitations are related to the human response factors such as inattentional blindness, which may lead to the inability to see complications within the surgical field. Furthermore, the prolonged use of AR can cause eye strain and headache due to phenomena such as the vergence-convergence conflict. AR technology may prove to be a better alternative to current orthopaedic surgery navigation systems. However, the current limitations should be mitigated to further improve the feasibility and usability of AR in the OR setting. It is important for both non-clinicians and clinicians to work in conjunction to guide the development of future iterations of AR technology and its implementation into the OR workflow.
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.