ArticleArthroplasty today2024
Noisy Robots? Comparison of Occupational Noise Levels Between Robotic-Assisted and Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Robotization on Employees' Mental and Physical Health: A Qualitative Study in the Czech and Slovak Republics.La Medicina del lavoro · 2026Article
- Noise Levels and Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in the Orthopaedic Operating Room: A Systematic Review.JB & JS open accessReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Noise exposure during surgery is a known occupational hazard, impacting staff hearing and surgical outcomes. Despite guidelines such as the Australian Work Health and Safety Act, noise safety remains largely neglected in orthopaedic surgery. Anecdotally, the introduction of robotic-assisted arthroplasty has contributed to increased noise production. This research article aims to investigate the role of robots in noise levels during arthroplasty. Methods: In this prospective observational study, we collected noise exposure data during total knee arthroplasty with and without robotic assistance. Noise levels were measured using a smartphone placed in the surgeon's breast pocket. Patient demographics and surgical details were collected for subgroup analysis. Mean (LAeq), time-weighted average, and peak noise levels, as well as dose equivalent were calculated to quantify the exposure. Results: A total of 65 knee arthroplasty sound recordings were included with a mean noise level of 82.0 dB (standard deviation [SD]: 3.9). Robotic-assisted surgeries exhibited significantly higher levels than using the conventional technique: 82.4 (SD: 3.2) vs 78.4 dB (SD: 3.8) (<0.0001). These values exceed some of the recommended guidelines. Peak exposure levels were similar in both categories at 109.6 (SD: 2.7) and 110.7 dB (SD: 4.3), remaining below the safety threshold. Conclusions: This study highlights the potential for harmful noise exposure in orthopaedic surgery, emphasizing the contribution of robotic-assisted procedures. Our findings indicate noise levels approximate or exceed international safety guidelines. The results support the wearing of personal protective hearing equipment, and other preventative strategies. Our study provides insights into an underappreciated aspect of orthopaedic surgery.
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.