JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Mixed reality (MR) is a tool that integrates elements from both the real and virtual worlds. Its potential applications are manifold, with promising developments observed in diverse fields, including healthcare, particularly in the context of surgical procedures. A number of studies have been conducted on mixed reality headsets, including the Microsoft HoloLens 2®, which may be employed in surgical training, planning, and navigation. It is imperative to ascertain whether medical professionals consider this technology indispensable in their professional lives. This study employs the Delphi method to assess the utility of MR in surgical settings and utilizes the Welphi online platform to facilitate this process. Furthermore, a PRISMA-like approach is employed to analyze the results of the initial round.

Objective:

The objective of this study is to examine the feasibility and advantages of mixed reality technology in surgical contexts. The findings are intended to inform and direct healthcare professionals, researchers, and developers in the advancement of mixed reality integration in surgical environments, with the ultimate goal of optimizing the quality and safety of treatments.

Methods:

A Delphi approach comprising of three rounds was implemented to ascertain consensus on the utility of MR surgical treatment. Participants were purposefully selected from experts with professional experience with technologies that provide a more immersive or interactive experience, such as virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), 3D laparoscopy, robotics, and other similar technologies applied in the surgical field. The initial round of the study was designed to allow surgeons to provide their insights into the potential applications of MR in surgical procedures. This phase employed a structured approach, with open-ended questions organized into five distinct sections. In the second round, the questions were derived from the analysis of the first round and organized according to main and sub-topics for hierarchical structuring. In the third round, the questions were identical to those posed in the second round, including the percentage results obtained in the previous round. This afforded the experts the opportunity to review their previous responses. A consensus round was subsequently conducted. In the analysis, Kendall's tau-b coefficient for correlation analysis was employed and significant correlations between distinct aspects were identified.

Results:

Twenty-two of the invited experts provided responses in both the initial and subsequent rounds, representing a 100% response rate. In the third round and consensus round, 20 experts participated, representing 91% response rate. The consensus round was conducted to present the results that had achieved a level of majority consensus of 95% on the usefulness of MR in surgical treatment. The objective was to have experts validate the results. The primary benefits of MR in surgery were identified as surgical navigation (with 75% consensus), surgical planning (with 75% of consensus), and teaching and training (with 70% of consensus).

Conclusions:

According to the Delphi study, the areas where MR technology is most beneficial in surgical contexts are surgical navigation, training, and planning. However, the costs and investments required for implementation may present a potential limitation for the integration of this technology in surgical procedures. Moreover, it is of crucial importance to comprehend the ethical implications associated with this matter, which may have implications for the security of patients.