Poor usability of computer-assisted navigation for hip fracture surgery

Abstract

Abstract Introduction The STRYKER ADAPT computer-assisted navigation system provides intraoperative feedback to the surgeon regarding implant placement of the Gamma3 nail. The usability of the ADAPT system has not been evaluated. The aim of the study was to investigate the perceived usability of the ADAPT system. Materials and methods This was a descriptive study with prospectively collected data. ADAPT was introduced at Aarhus University Hospital in February 2021. Prior to introduction, surgeons at the department attended a general introduction to the system. ADAPT was introduced to the surgical nurses and was on display at the surgical ward at more than one occasion, where personal introduction to the system was possible. After introduction, it was mandatory to use ADAPT when using the Gamma3 nail to treat intertrochanteric femur fractures. After each procedure, primary and an eventual supervisor answered a questionnaire, which encompassed the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire. The SUS is a ten-item questionnaire regarding the perceived usability of a system. SUS scores were translated to adjectives, describing user experience on a 7-point adjective scale (worst imaginable, awful, poor, ok, good, excellent, best imaginable). User acceptability, defined as “not acceptable”, “marginal” or “acceptable”, was also used to interpret the SUS scores. Results ADAPT was used in 50 procedures by 29 different surgeons, with varying skill-level. Median SUS-score after first-time use of ADAPT for all 29 surgeons was 43 (range: 5–60), which translated to “poor” or “not acceptable”. For surgeons who performed ≥ 3 ADAPT-assisted procedures, there were no statistically significant difference in their first to latest SUS-score (median difference: 4.3, p = 0.5). In free text comments ADAPT was positively described as helpful in placement of K-wire and providing educational opportunities for inexperienced surgeons and negatively as inconsistent, slow, time consuming, and causing excessive fluoroscopy. Conclusions Usability and acceptability of ADAPT was rated as “poor” or “not acceptable” by the majority of operating surgeons. ADAPT has not been used at our institution based on these findings. The System Usability Scale may be used in further research exploring usability and acceptability of novel computer-assisted navigation systems for orthopaedic surgery.