Do Quantifiable Differences in Physiologic Stress Exist in Surgeons When Comparing the Use of a Powered Femoral Impactor Versus Manual Impaction in Total Hip Arthroplasty?
Do Quantifiable Differences in Physiologic Stress Exist in Surgeons When Comparing the Use of a Powered Femoral Impactor Versus Manual Impaction in Total Hip Arthroplasty?
This study investigates the use of an automated impactor device in total hip arthroplasty versus manual malleting method and the physiological strain on the surgeon. This study will be a randomized, prospective, multicenter study involving fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeons. Each participating surgeon will contribute data from 50 primary, elective THA cases, using the HAMMR powered impactor in 25 cases and manual impaction in 25 cases.
Inclusion Criteria:
Patients undergoing primary elective THAs Participants over the age of 18 Patients with compatible implants
Exclusion Criteria:
Attending orthopaedic surgeons with pre-existing cardiorespiratory or musculoskeletal conditions Use of cemented or hybrid THA Patients undergoing a conversion or revision THA Patients undergoing a non-elective THA (i.e., for fracture) Participants lacking cognitive capacity to consent Participants who are pregnant