ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2025
Is virtual reality training for lumbosacral freehand pedicle screw placement an alternative to conventional training?
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeThe goal of this study was to determine whether residents can be taught to place spinal pedicle screws in a virtual reality (VR) environment and if the results are comparable to conventional training.
methodsIn this pilot study, four neurosurgery residents with less than one year of experience in spine surgery performed three rounds of pedicle screw instrumentation from L1 to S1. Both groups performed the first instrumentation after self-instruction. Before the second instrumentation, one group had conventional training, which was instruction on a synthetic bone model, and the other group was trained in a virtual environment. For the last instrumentation, both groups had both trainings. After completion, screw placement was rated by a blinded reader according to the trajectory and integrity of the screw canal. For statistical analysis, we used logistic regression for individual variability with Firth's bias reduction method.
resultsAfter self-instruction 21/48 (44%) screws were misplaced, 6 (25%) in the group before conventional training and 15 (64%) in the group before VR-training. Both trainings led to a significant reduction of screw misplacement, with only a single misplaced screw in the VR-training group (2%, p < 0.001) and none in the conventional training group (p = 0.008). In both groups, no significant difference was found regarding the misplacement rate from the first to the second training (p = 0.19).
conclusionsTraining in a virtual reality environment for lumbosacral pedicle screw placement is associated with an easy learning curve. Comparable outcomes are observed with conventional training, however, definitive conclusions regarding the relative effectiveness of either approach will require validation in studies with larger cohorts.
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.