ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Usefulness of Mixed Reality in Surgical Treatment: Delphi Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07648056 (Comparative Effectiveness of Mixed Reality Versus Traditional Simulation in Arthroscopic Surgical Training), which is not on this 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.
Comparative Effectiveness of Mixed Reality Versus Traditional Simulation in Arthroscopic Surgical Training: A Parallel-Group Randomized Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integration of high-resolution mixed reality models into resident training.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2026Article
- Exploring the Application of HoloLens Mixed Reality Combined with Eye Tracking and Visual Perception Technologies in Pediatric Orthopedic 3D Education.Journal of medical systems · 2025Review
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
backgroundMixed reality (MR) combines real and virtual elements and has shown promise in diverse fields, including surgical procedures. MR headsets may support surgical navigation, planning, and training. It is crucial to determine whether medical professionals consider this technology indispensable. This study uses the Delphi method, facilitated by the Welphi web-based platform, to assess the utility of MR in surgical settings and analyzes the results of the first round using a systematic approach modeled on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework.
objectiveThis study aims to examine the feasibility and advantages of MR technology in surgical contexts. The findings are intended to inform and direct health care professionals, researchers, and developers in advancing MR integration into surgical environments to optimize treatment quality and safety.
methodsA 3-round Delphi approach was implemented to ascertain consensus on the utility of MR in surgical treatment. Participants (n=22) were purposefully selected from among experts with professional experience in technologies such as virtual reality, augmented reality, 3D laparoscopy, and robotics. In the first round, participants provided insights into the potential applications of MR in surgical procedures through open-ended questions structured across 5 distinct sections. Responses were analyzed to develop the second-round questionnaire, which was hierarchically organized into main topics and subtopics. In the third round, the questions were identical to those in the second round, including the percentage results, allowing participants to reconsider their responses. A consensus round was subsequently conducted. The majority consensus level was defined as agreement by ≥70% of the participants in a given round.
resultsThe study was conducted from January to May 2024. All 22 invited experts provided responses in both the first and second rounds (100% response rate). In the third and consensus rounds, 20 (91%) of the 22 experts participated. The consensus round, conducted to present the results, yielded a majority consensus (19/20, 95%) on the usefulness of MR in surgical treatment. The primary benefits of MR in surgery were identified as surgical navigation (15/20, 75%), planning (15/20, 75%), and teaching and training (14/20, 70%). In addition, 75% (15/20) of the experts identified cost and investments as primary constraints. We used the Kendall tau-b coefficient for correlation analysis, and significant correlations were identified between distinct aspects.
conclusionsMR technology is most beneficial in surgical navigation, planning, and training. However, the costs and investments required for implementation may present a potential limitation for the integration of this technology into surgical procedures. Moreover, it is of crucial importance to consider the ethical implications associated with MR use, particularly regarding patient safety and privacy.
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.