Making minimally invasive THR safe: conclusions from biomechanical simulation and analysis.

The use of smaller surgical incisions has become popularized for total hip arthroplasty (THR) because of the potential benefits of shorter recovery and improved cosmetic appearance. However, an increased incidence of serious complications has been reported. To minimize the risks of minimally invasive approaches to THR, we have developed an experimental approach which enables us to evaluate risk factors in these procedures through cadaveric simulations performed within the laboratory. During cadaveric hip replacement procedures performed via posterior and antero-lateral mini-incisions, pressures developed between the wound edges and the retractors were approximately double those recorded during conventional hip replacement using Charnley retractors (p < 0.01). In MIS procedures performed via the dual-incision approach, lack of direct visualisation of the proximal femur led to misalignment of broaches and implants with increased risk of cortical fracture during canal preparation and implant insertion. Cadaveric simulation of surgical procedures allows surgeons to measure variables affecting the technical success of surgery and to master new procedures without placing patients at risk.

Controlled Software Evaluation Methodology: Case Simulation and Cognitive User Analysis

Software for use with patient records is challenging to design and difficult to evaluate because of the tremendous variability of patient circumstances. A method was devised by the authors to overcome a number of difficulties. The method evaluates and compares objectively various software products for use in emergency departments and compares software to conventional methods like dictation and templated chart forms. The technique utilizes oral case simulation and video recording for analysis. The methodology and experiences of executing a study using this case simulation are discussed in this presentation.

The assumptions and effects of conservative procedures in low -dose risk assessment for setting safety standards

Conservative procedures in low-dose risk assessment are used to set safety standards for known or suspected carcinogens. However, the assumptions upon which the methods are based and the effects of these methods are not well understood.^ To minimize the number of false-negatives and to reduce the cost of bioassays, animals are given very high doses of potential carcinogens. Results must then be extrapolated to much smaller doses to set safety standards for risks such as one per million. There are a number of competing methods that add a conservative safety factor into these calculations.^ A method of quantifying the conservatism of these methods was described and tested on eight procedures used in setting low-dose safety standards. The results using these procedures were compared by computer simulation and by the use of data from a large scale animal study.^ The method consisted of determining a "true safe dose" (tsd) according to an assumed underlying model. If one assumed that Y = the probability of cancer = P(d), a known mathematical function of the dose, then by setting Y to some predetermined acceptable risk, one can solve for d, the model's "true safe dose".^ Simulations were generated, assuming a binomial distribution, for an artificial bioassay. The eight procedures were then used to determine a "virtual safe dose" (vsd) that estimates the tsd, assuming a risk of one per million. A ratio R = ((tsd-vsd)/vsd) was calculated for each "experiment" (simulation). The mean R of 500 simulations and the probability R $<$ 0 was used to measure the over and under conservatism of each procedure.^ The eight procedures included Weil's method, Hoel's method, the Mantel-Byran method, the improved Mantel-Byran, Gross's method, fitting a one-hit model, Crump's procedure, and applying Rai and Van Ryzin's method to a Weibull model.^ None of the procedures performed uniformly well for all types of dose-response curves. When the data were linear, the one-hit model, Hoel's method, or the Gross-Mantel method worked reasonably well. However, when the data were non-linear, these same methods were overly conservative. Crump's procedure and the Weibull model performed better in these situations. ^