ArticleJournal of pain research2024
Comparison of Mixed Reality-Assisted Spinal Puncture with Landmark-Guided Spinal Puncture by Novice Practitioners: A Pilot Study.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing Medical Training with Mixed Reality and Haptic Feedback Simulator for Acupuncture Needling.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- An attempt to evaluate the use of mixed reality in surgically treated pediatric oncology patients.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Performing spinal anaesthesia in elderly patients with ligament calcification or hyperostosis is challenging for novice practitioners. This pilot study aimed to compare the effectiveness of mixed reality-assisted spinal puncture (MRasp) with that of landmark-guided spinal puncture (LGsp) by novice practitioners in elderly patients. Methods: In this pilot study, 36 patients (aged ≥65 years) scheduled for elective surgery under spinal anaesthesia by anaesthesiology residents were included. Patients were randomly assigned to the MRasp group (n = 18) or the LGsp group (n = 18). The outcomes included the number of needle insertion attempts, redirection attempts, passes, the rate of successful first-attempt needle insertion, the rate of successful first needle pass, the spinal puncture time, the total procedure time, and the incidence of perioperative complications. Results: The median number of needle insertion attempts was significantly fewer in the MRasp group than in the LGsp group (1.0 vs 2.0, Conclusion: This pilot study found that novice practitioners made significantly fewer needle insertion attempts in the MRasp group compared to the LGsp group when performing spinal anaesthesia on elderly patients. A future randomized controlled trial (RCT) is warranted to validate its effectiveness. Trial Registration: This trial was registered at https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=178960 (ChiCTR-IPR-2300068520). Public title: Mixed reality-assisted versus landmark-guided spinal puncture in elderly patients: a randomized controlled pilot study. Principal investigator: Lei Gao. The registration date was February 22, 2023. The date of the first participant enrolment was February 27, 2023.
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.