Observational studyScientific reports2024
Comparison of neck angle and musculoskeletal discomfort of surgeon in cataract surgery between three-dimensional heads-up display system and conventional microscope.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07301385 (Evaluation of Head-Mounted Spatial Computing and Three-Dimensional), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Evaluation of Head-Mounted Spatial Computing and Three-Dimensional (3D) Visualization in Ocular Microsurgery: A Feasibility and Safety Study
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in cataract surgery: is a new era on the horizon?Current opinion in ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Apple Vision Pro as the Intended Primary Intraoperative Visualization Platform for Complete Cataract Surgery: A Prospective Single-Center Feasibility Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Stereoscopic Projection of Cataract Surgery Video and Observer Perception of Intraocular Spatial Relationships.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Comparison Between 3D Heads-Up Display System and Standard Operating Microscope in Diabetic Vitrectomy for Tractional Retinal Detachment.Romanian journal of ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The three-dimensional heads-up display system (3D HUDS) is increasingly utilized by ophthalmologists and suggested to offer ergonomic benefits compared to conventional operating microscopes. We aimed to quantitatively assess the surgeon's neck angle and musculoskeletal discomfort during cataract surgery using commercially available 3D HUDS and conventional microscope. In this single-center comparative observational study, the surgeon conducted routine phacoemulsification surgeries using Artevo® 800 and Opmi Lumera® 700 (both from Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). The surgeon's intraoperative neck angle was measured using the Cervical Range of Motion device. Postoperative musculoskeletal discomfort was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score after each surgery. A total of 80 cataract surgeries were analyzed, with 40 using Artevo® 800 and 40 using Opmi Lumera® 700. The neck angle was extended when using Artevo® 800 and flexed when using Opmi Lumera® 700 during continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis (CCC), phacoemulsification, and intraocular lens (IOL) placement (- 8.18 ± 2.85° vs. 8.27 ± 2.93° in CCC, - 7.83 ± 3.30° vs. 8.87 ± 2.83° in phacoemulsification, - 7.43 ± 3.80° vs. 7.67 ± 3.73° in IOL placement, respectively; all p < 0.001). The VAS score was significantly lower in surgeries performed with Artevo® 800 (1.27 ± 0.55 vs. 1.73 ± 0.64, p < 0.001). The findings suggest that 3D HUDS help reduce neck flexion and lower work-related musculoskeletal discomfort through ergonomic improvements.
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.