Abstract
Background
Complications such as dislocations, impingement and early wear following total hip arthroplasty (THA) increase with acetabular cup implant malorientation. These errors are more common with low-volume centres or in novice hands. Currently, this skill is most commonly taught during real surgery with an expert trainer, but simulated training may offer a safer and more accessible solution. This study investigated if a novel MicronTracker® enhanced Microsoft HoloLens® augmented reality (EAR) headset was as effective as one-on-one expert surgeon (ES) training for teaching novice surgeons hip cup orientation skill.
Methods
Twenty-four medical students were randomly assigned to EAR or ES training groups. Participants used a modified sawbone/foam pelvis model for hip cup orientation simulation. A validated EAR headset measured the orientation of acetabular cup implants and displayed this in the participant”s field of view. The system calculated the difference between planned and achieved orientation as a solid-angle error.
Six different inclination and anteversion combinations, related to hypothetical patient-specific anatomy, were used as target orientations. Learning curves were measured over four sessions, each one week apart. Error in orientations of non-taught angles and during a concealed pelvic tilt were measured to assess translation of skills. A post-test questionnaire was used for qualitative analysis of procedure understanding and participant experience.
Results
Novice surgeons of similar experience in both groups performed with a similar error prior to training (ES: 15.7°±6.9°, EAR: 14.2°±7.1°, p>0.05). During training, EAR participants were guided to significantly better orientation errors than ES (ES: 6.0°±3.4°, EAR: 1.1°±0.9°, p<0.001).
After four training sessions, the orientation error in both groups significantly reduced (ES: 15.7°±6.9° to 8.2°±4.6°, p<0.001; EAR: 14.2°±7.0° to 9.6°±5.7°, p<0.001). Participants in both groups achieved the same levels of orientation accuracy in non-taught angles and when the pelvis was tilted (p>0.05).
In post-training evaluation, participants expressed a preference towards ES rather than EAR for learning orientation skills and related visuospatial and procedure-specific skills. 79% of participants indicated EAR simulator training and ES in combination would be their preferred training method.
Discussion
A novel head-mounted EAR platform delivered training to novice surgeons more accurately than an expert surgeon. Both EAR and ES enabled novices to acquire and retain skills on a learning curve to orientate the implant. These skills were translated to non-taught orientations and in the presence of a pelvic tilt.
Conclusions
Augmented-reality simulators may be a feasible and valid method for teaching novice surgeon”s visuospatial skills for THA on a learning curve, to compliment traditional intraoperative training.
