Optimizing intraoperative video for surgical training: a comparative study of three recording techniques in hip arthroplasty

High-quality intraoperative video documentation is increasingly valued in surgery for its role in surgical evaluation, procedural archiving, and education. However, the comparative advantages of different recording methods have not been thoroughly examined. In this prospective, double-blinded study, 44 experienced orthopedic surgeons evaluated posterior total hip arthroplasty videos recorded using three techniques: a head-mounted camera, a light-handle-mounted camera, and an externally operated camera. All videos were captured by the same surgeon using standardized hardware and settings. Participants assessed video quality and educational value using a structured questionnaire. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and chi-square testing. The light-handle-mounted camera received the highest mean scores across all five evaluation domains, including visual clarity, image stability, and overall quality (mean scores ranging from 6.91 to 7.98). Repeated measures ANOVA confirmed statistically significant differences among the three camera techniques for all five questions (<i>p</i> = 0.022-0.043). Post hoc analysis revealed that the light-handle-mounted camera significantly outperformed the head-mounted system (<i>p</i> < 0.05 for all comparisons), while the external camera also demonstrated superiority over the head-mounted method. Chi-square testing showed a significant difference in educational suitability ratings (Question 6), with the light-handle-mounted system receiving the highest percentage of affirmative responses (79.5%) compared to the head-mounted (50.0%) and external cameras (31.8%) (<i>p</i> < 0.001). The light-handle-mounted system offered the most balanced solution, providing stable, high-quality recordings without disrupting sterility or workflow. While head-mounted and external methods have niche applications, their practical limitations reduce their suitability for routine documentation in procedures.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Computer Assisted Surgery
Published
2025-09-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/24699322.2025.2562871
Primary Topic
Surgical Simulation and Training
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Optimizing intraoperative video for surgical training: a comparative study of three recording techniques in hip arthroplasty

Mehmet Süleyman Abul, Ömer Faruk Sevim
Computer Assisted Surgery
Surgical Simulation and Training
article

Optimizing intraoperative video for surgical training: a comparative study of three recording techniques in hip arthroplasty

Mehmet Süleyman Abul, Ömer Faruk Sevim
article en

Abstract

High-quality intraoperative video documentation is increasingly valued in surgery for its role in surgical evaluation, procedural archiving, and education. However, the comparative advantages of different recording methods have not been thoroughly examined. In this prospective, double-blinded study, 44 experienced orthopedic surgeons evaluated posterior total hip arthroplasty videos recorded using three techniques: a head-mounted camera, a light-handle-mounted camera, and an externally operated camera. All videos were captured by the same surgeon using standardized hardware and settings. Participants assessed video quality and educational value using a structured questionnaire. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and chi-square testing. The light-handle-mounted camera received the highest mean scores across all five evaluation domains, including visual clarity, image stability, and overall quality (mean scores ranging from 6.91 to 7.98). Repeated measures ANOVA confirmed statistically significant differences among the three camera techniques for all five questions (<i>p</i> = 0.022-0.043). Post hoc analysis revealed that the light-handle-mounted camera significantly outperformed the head-mounted system (<i>p</i> < 0.05 for all comparisons), while the external camera also demonstrated superiority over the head-mounted method. Chi-square testing showed a significant difference in educational suitability ratings (Question 6), with the light-handle-mounted system receiving the highest percentage of affirmative responses (79.5%) compared to the head-mounted (50.0%) and external cameras (31.8%) (<i>p</i> < 0.001). The light-handle-mounted system offered the most balanced solution, providing stable, high-quality recordings without disrupting sterility or workflow. While head-mounted and external methods have niche applications, their practical limitations reduce their suitability for routine documentation in procedures.

Computer Assisted SurgeryVol. 30(1)
Dr Lütfi Kırdar Kartal Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi (TR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Surgical Simulation and Training
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.