The library holds 28 Orthopedics studies, published 2019–2026; 15 of them since 2024.
Study designs: 4 comparative or prospective studies, 1 retrospective study, 7 surveys and user studies, 7 reviews and 9 case reports, case series and technical reports.
Quoted from the studies. Each question lists the studies that report on it.
Of 11 studies with a finding on this question: 7 report a positive finding, 1 mixed, 2 descriptive, 1 no significant difference. These reflect what each study's authors report.
“NPS was +71, with 75% promoters.”
Waugh 2025 · Survey/user study · n: 24 surgeon responses
“All subjects strongly agreed that MR can be used effectively for surgical training, whereas 10 (90.9%) strongly agreed that it can be used effectively for preoperative planning.”
Moglia 2024 · Survey/user study
“iVR was perceived to be valuable for the field of orthopaedic surgery providing face validity for the technology.”
Hiemstra 2024 · Survey/user study
Of 4 studies with a finding on this question: 3 report a positive finding, 1 descriptive. These reflect what each study's authors report.
“All participants agreed that the VR representation matched PACS CT imaging, and 87% reported a change in operative plan.”
Waugh 2025 · Survey/user study · n: 24 surgeon responses
“Users reported they would change the surgical approach or margins 44.4 % of the time after reviewing with VR technology.”
Vucicevic 2025 · Survey/user study · n: 4 cases
“In addition, the intended patient positioning changed in 16.1% of the cases, the surgical approach in 33.9% and osteosynthesis in 39.3%.”
Bitschi 2023 · Survey/user study · n: 3 cases
Of 8 studies with a finding on this question: 7 report a positive finding, 1 mixed. These reflect what each study's authors report.
“A Likert-scale questionnaire showed that the MR 3D hologram group outperformed the 2D group across all aspects of spatial awareness of the patient’s pathoanatomy and was viewed as a more effective tool for preoperative planning.”
Wong 2026 · Retrospective case series · n: 72 patients
“VR significantly improved surgeons’ understanding of fracture patterns (Wilcoxon signed-rank test: Z = –3.93, p<0.001, r = 0.59).”
Waugh 2025 · Survey/user study · n: 24 surgeon responses
“Tumor borders were clearly delineated in 0 % and 66.6 % cases when evaluating with conventional 2D imaging and VR, respectively.”
Vucicevic 2025 · Survey/user study · n: 4 cases
Of 3 studies with a finding on this question: 1 report a positive finding, 1 mixed, 1 descriptive. These reflect what each study's authors report.
“Overall, 3D technologies are gradually becoming an integral part of a surgeon's preoperative toolbox, allowing for increased surgical accuracy and reduction of operation time, mainly in complex and unique surgical cases.”
Portnoy 2023 · Narrative review
“The mean planned operative time of 156 (SD 47) minutes was significantly lower (p < 0.001) in the VR group than in the CT group (172 min; SD 44).”
Colcuc 2024 · Comparative study · n: 30 cases
“Since December 2024, generating cinematic-rendered 3D models with the upgraded MR software platform (version 2) has taken an average of 61 minutes (49–156).”
Wong 2026 · Retrospective case series · n: 72 patients
Of 4 studies with a finding on this question: 3 report a positive finding, 1 descriptive. These reflect what each study's authors report.
“VR application in preoperative planning improved the RI accuracy in acetabular cup placement for THA, demonstrating its potential to enhance surgical precision for experienced surgeons.”
Ueno 2024 · Prospective cohort · n: 34 patients
“The anteroposterior pelvic X-ray film was rechecked at 2 days after operation, of which 3 hips were consistent with the planned varus angle of VR preoperative planning, and the error value of varus angle of the remaining 14 hips was 1°-4°.”
Xia 2021 · Case series · n: 11 patients
“Among them, the difference of the neck-shaft angle was consistent with planned varus angle in 5 hips, while the error of the remaining 6 hips was 1-4°.”
Shi 2019 · Case series · n: 7 patients
Of 3 studies with a finding on this question: 2 descriptive, 1 no significant difference. These reflect what each study's authors report.
“VR technology combined with reduction plasty of the femoral head can achieve satisfactory short-term effectiveness in the treatment of coxa plana.”
Qiu 2023 · Case series · n: 3 patients
“The modified transtrochanteric curved varus osteotomy for the treatment of ONFH is theoretically feasible, and the short-term effectiveness of this operation combined with VR technology is satisfactory.”
Xia 2021 · Case series · n: 11 patients
Of 3 studies with a finding on this question: 3 descriptive. These reflect what each study's authors report.
“These effects were most pronounced among less experienced raters, highlighting MR's role as a cognitive support tool and a promising instrument in surgical education.”
Dust 2026 · Comparative study · n: 22 cases
“The effect was most evident in less-experienced surgeons, indicating MR's value for surgical training and preoperative planning.”
Dust 2025 · Validation study · n: 22 cases
“The potential for utilizing iVR technology for distance learning, mentorship and global education appears promising.”
Hiemstra 2024 · Survey/user study
Of 4 studies with a finding on this question: 3 report a positive finding, 1 descriptive. These reflect what each study's authors report.
“MR was used in preoperative planning (n = 3), intraoperative navigation (n = 2), and surgical training (n = 2).”
Joshi 2026 · Systematic review
“The emerging MR technology adds a new dimension to digital assistive tools with a more accessible and less costly alternative in orthopaedic oncology.”
Wong 2022 · Narrative review
“Health care professionals can feasibly conduct complex MDT-Ms using a novel metaverse platform on commercially available IVR headsets.”
Ghaderi 2024 · Feasibility study
Dust T et al. · European journal of trauma and emergency surgery · 2026
Orthopedics · Comparative study · n: 22 cases
“Mixed Reality (MR) improved interobserver agreement in preoperative planning for tibial plateau fractures, particularly for surgical approach selection and patient positioning.”
Dust T et al. · Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025
Orthopedics · Validation study · n: 22 cases
“Diagnostic confidence for AO/OTA differed significantly between modalities (p = 0.045), with the highest values observed for 3DP (76%) and MR (58%) compared to CT (47%).”
p = 0.045
Colcuc C et al. · Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024
Orthopedics · Comparative study · n: 30 cases
“The mean planned operative time of 156 (SD 47) minutes was significantly lower (p < 0.001) in the VR group than in the CT group (172 min; SD 44).”
156
Ueno M et al. · Cureus · 2024
Orthopedics · Prospective cohort · n: 34 patients
“Other surgical parameters, such as radiographic anteversion, operation time, blood loss, and postoperative hospital stay, showed no significant differences between the groups.”
Wong KC et al. · Exploration of Digital Health Technologies · 2026
Orthopedics · Retrospective case series · n: 72 patients
“A Likert-scale questionnaire showed that the MR 3D hologram group outperformed the 2D group across all aspects of spatial awareness of the patient’s pathoanatomy and was viewed as a more effective tool for preoperative planning.”
Waugh D et al. · SVOA Orthopaedics · 2025
Orthopedics · Survey/user study · n: 24 surgeon responses
“All participants agreed that the VR representation matched PACS CT imaging, and 87% reported a change in operative plan.”
87%
Vucicevic RS et al. · Journal of orthopaedics · 2025
Orthopedics · Survey/user study · n: 4 cases
“Users reported they would change the surgical approach or margins 44.4 % of the time after reviewing with VR technology.”
44.4 %
Moglia A et al. · IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2024
Orthopedics · Survey/user study
“All subjects strongly agreed that MR can be used effectively for surgical training, whereas 10 (90.9%) strongly agreed that it can be used effectively for preoperative planning.”
90.9%
Hiemstra LA et al. · Journal of ISAKOS · 2024
Orthopedics · Survey/user study
“iVR was perceived to be valuable for the field of orthopaedic surgery providing face validity for the technology.”
Bitschi D et al. · Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
Orthopedics · Survey/user study · n: 3 cases
“In addition, the intended patient positioning changed in 16.1% of the cases, the surgical approach in 33.9% and osteosynthesis in 39.3%.”
33.9%
Lu L et al. · Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022
Orthopedics · Survey/user study
“Analysis of the Likert-scale questionnaire shows that MR adds significant value to understanding and communication, spatial awareness, learning and effectiveness.”
Popescu D et al. · Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine · 2021
Orthopedics · Survey/user study · n: 3 cases
“The following order of using the tools was preferred: DICOM viewer, followed by Unity VR and 3DP.”
Joshi S et al. · European journal of surgical oncology · 2026
Orthopedics · Systematic review
“MR was used in preoperative planning (n = 3), intraoperative navigation (n = 2), and surgical training (n = 2).”
Policicchio TJ et al. · Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025
Orthopedics · Narrative review
Calem DB et al. · EFORT open reviews · 2024
Orthopedics · Narrative review
Portnoy Y et al. · International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2023
Orthopedics · Narrative review
“Overall, 3D technologies are gradually becoming an integral part of a surgeon's preoperative toolbox, allowing for increased surgical accuracy and reduction of operation time, mainly in complex and unique surgical cases.”
Nazzal EM et al. · The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume · 2023
Orthopedics · Narrative review
Wong KC et al. · Orthopedic research and reviews · 2022
Orthopedics · Narrative review
“The emerging MR technology adds a new dimension to digital assistive tools with a more accessible and less costly alternative in orthopaedic oncology.”
Verhey JT et al. · The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery · 2020
Orthopedics · Narrative review
Wang K et al. · Journal of bone oncology · 2025
Orthopedics · Technical development
“Furthermore, LS showed that clinicians in the DCU-Net-based MR group had better spatial awareness of tumor preoperative planning.”
Waugh D et al. · Cureus · 2025
Orthopedics · Technical report
“We have been able to demonstrate proof of functionality in what we believe is a very useful tool to aid trauma and orthopaedic pre-operative surgical planning and execution going forward.”
Ghaderi R et al. · Journal of medical extended reality · 2024
Orthopedics · Feasibility study
“Participants found that "data visualization" and "clinical decision-making" were effective in IVR: median 5 (interquartile range [IQR], 4-5) and 5 (IQR, 4-5), respectively.”
Launay MM et al. · Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (meeting abstract) · 2023
Orthopedics · Conference abstract
Qiu Y et al. · Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi · 2023
Orthopedics · Case series · n: 3 patients
“VR technology combined with reduction plasty of the femoral head can achieve satisfactory short-term effectiveness in the treatment of coxa plana.”
Wong KC et al. · Orthopedic research and reviews · 2023
Orthopedics · Feasibility study · n: 9 patients
“The qualitative survey of the LS questionnaire suggested that the MR group had superior spatial awareness of tumors and was considered more effective as a preoperative planning tool than the conventional group.”
D'Arienzo A et al. · Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
Orthopedics · Feasibility study · n: 1 patient
“Secondly, preoperative planning is proving to be reliable, easily replicable, and useful for the surgeon.”
Xia T et al. · Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi · 2021
Orthopedics · Case series · n: 11 patients
“The anteroposterior pelvic X-ray film was rechecked at 2 days after operation, of which 3 hips were consistent with the planned varus angle of VR preoperative planning, and the error value of varus angle of the remaining 14 hips was 1°-4°.”
Shi L et al. · Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi · 2019
Orthopedics · Case series · n: 7 patients
“Among them, the difference of the neck-shaft angle was consistent with planned varus angle in 5 hips, while the error of the remaining 6 hips was 1-4°.”
Summarises published research on VR/AR surgical planning across all platforms. Not product labelling. For Elucis indications see /elucis.
Intended for healthcare professionals.
Summaries and quotes describe each study's methods and the findings its authors report. They are not claims by Realize Medical and may contain errors: please read the original paper. Inclusion is not an endorsement of any product or use.