Claims

VR simulator training yields a higher rate of optimal (Grade I) pedicle screw placement than traditional training among residents and early-career surgeons

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? Pooled RCT analysis shows VR-trained trainees achieved a significantly higher rate of Grade I screw placement than those receiving conventional training (RR 1.36). → Pasqualotto Eric 2026

Evidence

Pasqualotto Eric 2026

Pasqualotto Eric, Pasqualotto Tales, Lopes Victor Hugo Pinheiro, Lunelli Laura, Santos Lucas Loiola. (2026). Virtual reality surgical simulator training of residents and early-career surgeons for pedicle screw placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-026-05008-1

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Random-effects meta-analysis of six RCTs comparing VR simulator training with traditional training for pedicle screw placement; pooled effect for optimal Grade I placement was "RR 1.36; 95% CI 1.15 to 1.61; p < 0.01; I2 = 76%". GRADE rated this outcome very low-certainty.

"residents and early-career surgeons trained with VR simulation achieved a higher rate of Grade I screw placement compared with traditional approaches (RR 1.36; 95% CI 1.15 to 1.61; p < 0.01; I2 = 76%; Fig. 2A)"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.