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?

Summary

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.

Eligibility

Age range

18+ years

Sex

All

Healthy volunteers

Yes

Interventions

• Device
  Automated Impaction (HAMMR)

  For cases that are randomized to the automated impaction HAMMR group, the surgeon will utilize an automated impactor device for impaction of the implant during total hip arthroplasty.

• Device
  Manual Malleting

  For cases that are randomized to the manual malleting group, the surgeon will utilize a mallet for impaction of the implant during total hip arthroplasty.

Location