So, what did the RCT show..?
=> No Difference
In terms of what really matters to people + patients..
Yes, mechanical assistance put the implants closer to the planned position- it limited the outliers- but there was no overall clinical effect.
What Really Matters..
This paper is a great example of what to look for:
Quality evidence: the Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) or Metanaylsis of multiple RCTs
What really matter: the Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) that tell you about pain + function.
A lot of published research points to better looking x-ray films..
Yes, John or Jane want to know that their x-ray films look good..
BUT not at the expense of a painful hip or knee replacement.
X-ray films are easy to measure. The 'robot' mechanical arm is a better measurement tool. And if you use a better measurement tool.. it's not surprising that the x-ray film looks better, more often.
Measuring outcomes that really matter to people, however, is hard. It's relies on people filling out questionnaires.
Measuring pain + function is therefore hard. So, there are fewer research papers out there telling us about what really matters.
This paper tells us clearly that, at the moment- the robots do NOT further improve pain + function.
There may be future potential. BUT, for now, there are more important things to focus on ππ