Applicability of augmented reality in orthopedic surgery - A systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Computer-assisted solutions are changing surgical practice continuously. One of the most disruptive technologies among the computer-integrated surgical techniques is Augmented Reality (AR). While Augmented Reality is increasingly used in several medical specialties, its potential benefit in orthopedic surgery is not yet clear. The purpose of this article is to provide a systematic review of the current state of knowledge and the applicability of AR in orthopedic surgery.Methods
A systematic review of the current literature was performed to find the state of knowledge and applicability of AR in Orthopedic surgery. A systematic search of the following three databases was performed: "PubMed", "Cochrane Library" and "Web of Science". The systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items on Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and it has been published and registered in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO).Results
31 studies and reports are included and classified into the following categories: Instrument / Implant Placement, Osteotomies, Tumor Surgery, Trauma, and Surgical Training and Education. Quality assessment could be performed in 18 studies. Among the clinical studies, there were six case series with an average score of 90% and one case report, which scored 81% according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist (JBI CAC). The 11 cadaveric studies scored 81% according to the QUACS scale (Quality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies).Conclusion
This manuscript provides 1) a summary of the current state of knowledge and research of Augmented Reality in orthopedic surgery presented in the literature, and 2) a discussion by the authors presenting the key remarks required for seamless integration of Augmented Reality in the future surgical practice.Trial registration
PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019128569.
SUBMITTER: Jud L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7023780 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Applicability of augmented reality in orthopedic surgery - A systematic review.
Jud Lukas L Fotouhi Javad J Andronic Octavian O Aichmair Alexander A Osgood Greg G Navab Nassir N Farshad Mazda M
BMC musculoskeletal disorders 20200215 1
<h4>Background</h4>Computer-assisted solutions are changing surgical practice continuously. One of the most disruptive technologies among the computer-integrated surgical techniques is Augmented Reality (AR). While Augmented Reality is increasingly used in several medical specialties, its potential benefit in orthopedic surgery is not yet clear. The purpose of this article is to provide a systematic review of the current state of knowledge and the applicability of AR in orthopedic surgery.<h4>Me ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAugmented reality (AR) is increasingly being explored in neurosurgical practice. By visualizing patient-specific, three-dimensional (3D) models in real time, surgeons can improve their spatial understanding of complex anatomy and pathology, thereby optimizing intra-operative navigation, localization, and resection. Here, we aimed to capture applications of AR in glioma surgery, their current status and future potential.MethodsA systematic review of the literature was conducted. This adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. PubMed, Embase, and Scopus electronic databases were queried from inception to October 10, 2022. Leveraging the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study design (PICOS) framework, study eligibility was evaluated in the qualitative synthesis. Data regarding AR workflow, surgical application, and associated outcomes were then extracted. The quality of evidence was additionally examined, using hierarchical classes of evidence in neurosurgery.ResultsThe search returned 77 articles. Forty were subject to title and abstract screening, while 25 proceeded to full text screening. Of these, 22 articles met eligibility criteria and were included in the final review. During abstraction, studies were classified as "development" or "intervention" based on primary aims. Overall, AR was qualitatively advantageous, due to enhanced visualization of gliomas and critical structures, frequently aiding in maximal safe resection. Non-rigid applications were also useful in disclosing and compensating for intra-operative brain shift. Irrespective, there was high variance in registration methods and measurements, which considerably impacted projection accuracy. Most studies were of low-level evidence, yielding heterogeneous results.ConclusionsAR has increasing potential for glioma surgery, with capacity to positively influence the onco-functional balance. However, technical and design limitations are readily apparent. The field must consider the importance of consistency and replicability, as well as the level of evidence, to effectively converge on standard approaches that maximize patient benefit.
| S-EPMC10476869 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTechnological advances have transformed vascular intervention in recent decades. In particular, improvements in imaging and data processing have allowed for the development of increasingly complex endovascular and hybrid interventions. Augmented reality (AR) is a subject of growing interest in surgery, with the potential to improve clinicians' understanding of 3D anatomy and aid in the processing of real-time information. This study hopes to elucidate the potential impact of AR technology in the rapidly evolving fields of vascular and endovascular surgery.ObjectiveThe aim of this review is to summarize the fundamental concepts of AR technologies and conduct a scoping review of the impact of AR and mixed reality in vascular and endovascular surgery.MethodsA systematic search of MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. All studies written in English from inception until January 8, 2021, were included in the search. Combinations of the following keywords were used in the systematic search string: ("augmented reality" OR "hololens" OR "image overlay" OR "daqri" OR "magic leap" OR "immersive reality" OR "extended reality" OR "mixed reality" OR "head mounted display") AND ("vascular surgery" OR "endovascular"). Studies were selected through a blinded process between 2 investigators (JE and AS) and assessed using data quality tools.ResultsAR technologies have had a number of applications in vascular and endovascular surgery. Most studies (22/32, 69%) used 3D imaging of computed tomography angiogram-derived images of vascular anatomy to augment clinicians' anatomical understanding during procedures. A wide range of AR technologies were used, with heads up fusion imaging and AR head-mounted displays being the most commonly applied clinically. AR applications included guiding open, robotic, and endovascular surgery while minimizing dissection, improving procedural times, and reducing radiation and contrast exposure.ConclusionsAR has shown promising developments in the field of vascular and endovascular surgery, with potential benefits to surgeons and patients alike. These include reductions in patient risk and operating times as well as in contrast and radiation exposure for radiological interventions. Further technological advances are required to overcome current limitations, including processing capacity and vascular deformation by instrumentation.
| S-EPMC9547335 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to review and synthesize the current research and state of augmented reality (AR), mixed reality (MR) and the applications developed for healthcare education beyond surgery.MethodsAn integrative review was conducted on all relevant material, drawing on different data sources, including the databases of PubMed, PsycINFO, and ERIC from January 2013 till September 2018. Inductive content analysis and qualitative synthesis were performed. Additionally, the quality of the studies was assessed with different structured tools.ResultsTwenty-six studies were included. Studies based on both AR and MR involved established applications in 27% of all cases (n=6), the rest being prototypes. The most frequently studied subjects were related to anatomy and anesthesia (n=13). All studies showed several healthcare educational benefits of AR and MR, significantly outperforming traditional learning approaches in 11 studies examining various outcomes. Studies had a low-to-medium quality overall with a MERSQI mean of 12.26 (SD=2.63), while the single qualitative study had high quality.ConclusionsThis review suggests the progress of learning approaches based on AR and MR for various medical subjects while moving the research base away from feasibility studies on prototypes. Yet, lacking validity of study conclusions, heterogeneity of research designs and widely varied reporting challenges transferability of the findings in the studies included in the review. Future studies should examine suitable research designs and instructional objectives achievable by AR and MR-based applications to strengthen the evidence base, making it relevant for medical educators and institutions to apply the technologies.
| S-EPMC7246121 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction:The field of augmented reality (AR) is rapidly growing with many new potential applications in medical education. This systematic review investigated the current state of augmented reality applications (ARAs) and developed an analytical model to guide future research in assessing ARAs as teaching tools in medical education. Methods:A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. This review followed PRISMA guidelines and included publications from January 1, 2000 to June 18, 2018. Inclusion criteria were experimental studies evaluating ARAs implemented in healthcare education published in English. Our review evaluated study quality and determined whether studies assessed ARA validity using criteria established by the GRADE Working Group and Gallagher et al., respectively. These findings were used to formulate an analytical model to assess the readiness of ARAs for implementation in medical education. Results:We identified 100,807 articles in the initial literature search; 36 met inclusion criteria for final review and were categorized into three categories: Surgery (23), Anatomy (9), and Other (4). The overall quality of the studies was poor and no ARA was tested for all five stages of validity. Our analytical model evaluates the importance of research quality, application content, outcomes, and feasibility of an ARA to gauge its readiness for implementation. Conclusion:While AR technology is growing at a rapid rate, the current quality and breadth of AR research in medical training is insufficient to recommend the adoption into educational curricula. We hope our analytical model will help standardize AR assessment methods and define the role of AR technology in medical education.
| S-EPMC7082471 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAugmented reality (AR) is a technology that integrates digital information into the user's real-world environment. It offers a new approach for treatments and education in medicine. AR aids in surgery planning and patient treatment and helps explain complex medical situations to patients and their relatives.ObjectiveThis systematic and bibliographic review offers an overview of the development of apps in AR with a medical use case from March 2012 to June 2017. This work can aid as a guide to the literature and categorizes the publications in the field of AR research.MethodsFrom March 2012 to June 2017, a total of 1309 publications from PubMed and Scopus databases were manually analyzed and categorized based on a predefined taxonomy. Of the total, 340 duplicates were removed and 631 publications were excluded due to incorrect classification or unavailable technical data. The remaining 338 publications were original research studies on AR. An assessment of the maturity of the projects was conducted on these publications by using the technology readiness level. To provide a comprehensive process of inclusion and exclusion, the authors adopted the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.ResultsThe results showed an increasing trend in the number of publications on AR in medicine. There were no relevant clinical trials on the effect of AR in medicine. Domains that used display technologies seemed to be researched more than other medical fields. The technology readiness level showed that AR technology is following a rough bell curve from levels 4 to 7. Current AR technology is more often applied to treatment scenarios than training scenarios.ConclusionsThis work discusses the applicability and future development of augmented- and mixed-reality technologies such as wearable computers and AR devices. It offers an overview of current technology and a base for researchers interested in developing AR apps in medicine. The field of AR is well researched, and there is a positive trend in its application, but its use is still in the early stages in the field of medicine and it is not widely adopted in clinical practice. Clinical studies proving the effectiveness of applied AR technologies are still lacking.
| S-EPMC6658230 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Remote virtual rehabilitation aroused growing interest in the last decades, and its role has gained importance following the recent spread of COVID19 pandemic. The advantages of virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), gamification, and telerehabilitation have been demonstrated in several medical fields. In this review, we searched the literature for studies using these technologies for orthopedic rehabilitation and analyzed studies' quality, type and field of rehabilitation, patients' characteristics, and outcomes to describe the state of the art of VR, AR, gamification, and telerehabilitation for orthopedic rehabilitation. METHODS:A comprehensive search on PubMed, Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, and Embase databases was conducted. This review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies published between 2015 and 2020 about remote virtual rehabilitations for orthopedic patients were selected. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) and Cochrane Risk-of-Bias assessment tool were used for quality assessment. RESULTS:24 studies (9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 15 non-randomized studies) and 2472 patients were included. Studies mainly concern telerehabilitation (56%), and to a lesser extent VR (28%), AR (28%), and gamification (16%). Remote virtual technologies were used following knee and hip arthroplasty. The majority of included patients were between 40 and 60 years old and had a university degree. Remote virtual rehabilitation was not inferior to face-to-face therapy, and physical improvements were demonstrated by increased clinical scores. Orthopedic virtual remote rehabilitation decreased costs related to transports, hospitalizations, and readmissions. CONCLUSION:The heterogeneity of included studies prevented a meta-analysis of their results. Age and social context influence adaptability to technology, and this can modify compliance to treatment and outcomes. A good relationship between patient and physiotherapist is essential for treatment compliance and new technologies are useful to maintain clinical interactions remotely. Remote virtual technologies allow the delivery of high-quality care at reduced costs. This is a necessity given the growing demand for orthopedic rehabilitation and increasing costs related to it. Future studies need to develop specific and objective methods to evaluate the clinical quality of new technologies and definitively demonstrate advantages of VR, AR, gamification, and telerehabilitation compared to face-to face orthopedic rehabilitation.
| S-EPMC7465609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study designA prospective, case-based, observational study.ObjectivesTo investigate how microscope-based augmented reality (AR) support can be utilized in various types of spine surgery.MethodsIn 42 spinal procedures (12 intra- and 8 extradural tumors, 7 other intradural lesions, 11 degenerative cases, 2 infections, and 2 deformities) AR was implemented using operating microscope head-up displays (HUDs). Intraoperative low-dose computed tomography was used for automatic registration. Nonlinear image registration was applied to integrate multimodality preoperative images. Target and risk structures displayed by AR were defined in preoperative images by automatic anatomical mapping and additional manual segmentation.ResultsAR could be successfully applied in all 42 cases. Low-dose protocols ensured a low radiation exposure for registration scanning (effective dose cervical 0.29 ± 0.17 mSv, thoracic 3.40 ± 2.38 mSv, lumbar 3.05 ± 0.89 mSv). A low registration error (0.87 ± 0.28 mm) resulted in a reliable AR representation with a close matching of visualized objects and reality, distinctly supporting anatomical orientation in the surgical field. Flexible AR visualization applying either the microscope HUD or video superimposition, including the ability to selectively activate objects of interest, as well as different display modes allowed a smooth integration in the surgical workflow, without disturbing the actual procedure. On average, 7.1 ± 4.6 objects were displayed visualizing target and risk structures reliably.ConclusionsMicroscope-based AR can be applied successfully to various kinds of spinal procedures. AR improves anatomical orientation in the surgical field supporting the surgeon, as well as it offers a potential tool for education.
| S-EPMC7263340 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Limited health literacy has been associated with adverse health outcomes. Undergoing orthopedic surgery often requires patients to make complex decisions and adhere to complicated instructions, suggesting that health literacy skills might have a profound impact on orthopedic surgery outcomes. Purpose: We sought to review the literature for studies investigating the level of health literacy in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery and also to assess how those studies report factors affecting health equity. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for all health literacy studies published in the orthopedic surgery literature up to February 8, 2022. Search terms included synonyms for health literacy and for all orthopedic surgery subspecialties. Two reviewers independently extracted study data in addition to indicators of equity reporting using the PROGRESS+ checklist (Place of Residence, Race/Ethnicity, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Social capital, Socioeconomic status, plus age, disability, and sexual orientation). Results: The search resulted in 616 studies; 9 studies remained after exclusion criteria were applied. Most studies were of arthroplasty (4/9; 44%) or trauma (3/9; 33%) patients. Validated health literacy assessments were used in 4 of the included studies, and only 3 studies reported the rate of limited health literacy in the patients studied, which ranged between 34% and 38.5%. At least one PROGRESS+ item was reported in 88% (8/9) of the studies. Conclusions: We found a paucity of appropriately designed studies that used validated measures of health literacy in the field of orthopedic surgery. The potential impact of health literacy on orthopedic patients and their outcomes has yet to be elucidated. Thoughtful, high-quality trials across diverse demographics and geographies are warranted.
| S-EPMC9837407 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAugmented reality (AR) is a rapidly expanding technology; it comprises the generation of new images from digital information in the real physical environment of a person, which simulates an environment where the artificial and real are mixed. The use of AR in physiotherapy has shown benefits in certain areas of patient health. However, these benefits have not been studied as a whole.ObjectiveThis study aims to ascertain the current scientific evidence on AR therapy as a complement to physiotherapy and to determine the areas in which it has been used the most and which variables and methods have been most effective.MethodsA systematic review registered in PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) recommendations. The search was conducted from July to August 2021 in the PubMed, PEDro, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library scientific databases using the keywords augmented reality, physiotherapy, physical therapy, exercise therapy, rehabilitation, physical medicine, fitness, and occupational therapy. The methodological quality was evaluated using the PEDro scale and the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network scale to determine the degree of recommendation. The Cochrane Collaboration tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias.ResultsIn total, 11 articles were included in the systematic review. Of the 11 articles, 4 (36%) contributed information to the meta-analysis. Overall, 64% (7/11) obtained a good level of evidence, and most had a B degree of recommendation of evidence. A total of 308 participants were analyzed. Favorable results were found for the Berg Balance Scale (standardized mean change 0.473, 95% CI -0.0877 to 1.0338; z=1.65; P=.10) and the Timed Up and Go test (standardized mean change -1.211, 95% CI -3.2005 to 0.7768; z=-1.194; P=.23).ConclusionsAR, in combination with conventional therapy, has been used for the treatment of balance and fall prevention in geriatrics, lower and upper limb functionality in stroke, pain in phantom pain syndrome, and turning in place in patients with Parkinson disease with freezing of gait. AR is effective for the improvement of balance; however, given the small size of the samples and the high heterogeneity of the studies, the results were not conclusive. Future studies using larger sample sizes and with greater homogeneity in terms of the devices used and the frequency and intensity of the interventions are needed.Trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020180766; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=180766.
| S-EPMC8717132 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRobot-assisted therapy has become a promising technology in the field of rehabilitation for poststroke patients with motor disorders. Motivation during the rehabilitation process is a top priority for most stroke survivors. With current advancements in technology there has been the introduction of virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), customizable games, or a combination thereof, that aid robotic therapy in retaining, or increasing the interests of, patients so they keep performing their exercises. However, there are gaps in the evidence regarding the transition from clinical rehabilitation to home-based therapy which calls for an updated synthesis of the literature that showcases this trend. The present review proposes a categorization of these studies according to technologies used, and details research in both upper limb and lower limb applications.ObjectiveThe goal of this work was to review the practices and technologies implemented in the rehabilitation of poststroke patients. It aims to assess the effectiveness of exoskeleton robotics in conjunction with any of the three technologies (VR, AR, or gamification) in improving activity and participation in poststroke survivors.MethodsA systematic search of the literature on exoskeleton robotics applied with any of the three technologies of interest (VR, AR, or gamification) was performed in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Direct & The Cochrane Library. Exoskeleton-based studies that did not include any VR, AR or gamification elements were excluded, but publications from the years 2010 to 2017 were included. Results in the form of improvements in the patients' condition were also recorded and taken into consideration in determining the effectiveness of any of the therapies on the patients.ResultsThirty studies were identified based on the inclusion criteria, and this included randomized controlled trials as well as exploratory research pieces. There were a total of about 385 participants across the various studies. The use of technologies such as VR-, AR-, or gamification-based exoskeletons could fill the transition from the clinic to a home-based setting. Our analysis showed that there were general improvements in the motor function of patients using the novel interfacing techniques with exoskeletons. This categorization of studies helps with understanding the scope of rehabilitation therapies that can be successfully arranged for home-based rehabilitation.ConclusionsFuture studies are necessary to explore various types of customizable games required to retain or increase the motivation of patients going through the individual therapies.
| S-EPMC6779025 | biostudies-literature