Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

WasatchSLC t1_ir5cyo8 wrote

Reply to comment by PsychoEngineer in Humans operating on humans are still better than robots operating on humans...even when a human is operating the robot. by Notreallyonreddityet

Statistically they aren’t any better than a surgeon who does the same thing all the time, like a surgeon who only hip and knee replacements. It’s kind of like trying to make a robot to do HVAC or plumbing, they just aren’t there yet.

1

PsychoEngineer t1_ir5fdxq wrote

Can you link to the study showing this overall?

The one linked by the OP was only a small study in the UK done by 3 doctors with barely over 100 patients with limited data used to determining the effectiveness/differences.

2

WasatchSLC t1_ir5go1c wrote

Schemitsch, Emil H. MD, FRCS(C). In Younger Patients with End-Stage Knee Osteoarthritis, Computer-Assisted Versus Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty Did Not Improve Function at 15 Years. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery: November 21, 2018 - Volume 100 - Issue 22 - p 1982 doi: 10.2106/JBJS.18.00917

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8142057/

1

WasatchSLC t1_ir5grn7 wrote

I think you’re going to find a lot of limited sample size and lack of long term outcomes.

1

PsychoEngineer t1_ir5i3uj wrote

And that’s where I have a hard time agreeing with your broad claim of not being any better.

1

WasatchSLC t1_ir5jubu wrote

I mean if we had the data it was significantly better, we’d be doing it. Just like if injections of stem cells into an arthritic joint cured arthritis we would do that. They just aren’t simply there yet. One day I’m sure they will be, but don’t underestimate a skilled human either.

1

WasatchSLC t1_ir5k7w7 wrote

But if you look at the knee outcome scores (which have been extensively validated), they aren’t better. So that’s why I make the statement.

1