The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery

The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery

Intraoperative Acoustics: Auditory Cues in Hip Reconstructive Surgery

Document Type : RESEARCH PAPER

Authors
Jeffrey M. Henstenburg 1
Walaa Abdelfadeel 1
Anthony J. Boniello 1
Joseph Schmitz 2
Jeffrey j. Vakil 1
Andrew M. Star 1
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
2 Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
10.22038/abjs.2021.53669.2669
Abstract
Background: Orthopaedic surgeons rely on visual and tactile cues to guide performance in the operating
room (OR). However, there is very little data on how sound changes during orthopaedic procedures and
how surgeons incorporate audio feedback to guide performance. This study attempts to define meaningful
changes in sound during vital aspects of total hip arthroplasty (THA) within the spectrum of human hearing.
Methods: 84 audio recordings were obtained during primary elective THA procedures during sawing of the
femoral neck, reaming of the acetabulum, acetabular cup impaction, polyethylene liner impaction, femoral
broaching, planning of the femoral calcar and press-fit of a porous-coated stem in 14 patients. We graphed
changes in frequency intensity across the human spectrum of hearing and sampled frequencies showing
differences over time for statistically meaningful changes.
Results: Sawing of the femoral neck, polyethylene impaction, and stem insertion showed significant
temporal increases in overall sound intensity. Calcar planing showed a significant decrease in sound
intensity. Moreover, spectrographic analysis showed that, for each of the critical tasks in THA, there were
characteristic frequencies that showed maximal changes in loudness. These changes were above the 1 dB
change in intensity required for detection by the human ear.
Conclusion: Our results clearly demonstrate reproducible sound changes during total hip arthroplasty that
are detectable by the human ear. Surgeons can incorporate sound as a valuable source of feedback while
performing total hip arthroplasty to guide optimal performance in the OR. These findings can be extrapolated
to other orthopaedic procedures that produce characteristic changes in sound. Moreover, it emphasizes the
importance of limiting ambient noise in the OR that might make sound changes hard to distinguish.
Level of evidence: IV
Keywords
Acoustics
Arthroplasty
Hip
Performance
Sound
  1. Ullah R, Bailie N, Crowther S, Cullen J. “Noise exposure in orthopaedic practice: potential health risk.” J Laryngol Otol. 2004; 118(6):413-6.
  2. Praamsma M, Carnahan H, Bectsein D, Veillette CJH, Gonzalez D, Dubrowski A. “Drilling sounds are used by surgeons and intermediate residents, but not novice orthopedic trainees, to guide drilling motions.” Can J Surg. 2008; 51(6):442-446.
  3. McConnell JS, Saunders PR, Young SK. The clinical relevance of sound changes produced during cementless hip arthroplasty: a correctly sized femoral broach creates a distinctive pattern of audio frequencies directly related to bone geometry. Bone Joint J. 2018; 100(12):1559-64.
  4. Sakai R, Kikuchi A, Morita T, Takahira N, Uchiyama K, Yamamoto T, et al. Hammering sound frequency analysis and prevention of intraoperative periprosthetic fractures during total hip arthroplasty. Hip International. 2011; 21(6):718-23.
  5. Morohashi I, Iwase H, Kanda A, Sato T, Homma Y, Mogami A, et al. Acoustic pattern evaluation during cementless hip arthroplasty surgery may be a new method for predicting complications. SICOT-J. 2017;3.
  6. Lentz JJ. Psychoacoustics : Perception of Normal and Impaired Hearing with Audiology Applications. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing, Inc; 2020.
  7. Dobie RA, Van Hemel S, National Research Council. Basics of Sound, the Ear, and Hearing. InHearing Loss: Determining Eligibility for Social Security Benefits 2004. National Academies Press (US).
  8. Brainard MS, Doupe AJ. Auditory feedback in learning and maintenance of vocal behaviour. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2000;1(1):31-40.
  9. Arlettaz R, Jones G, Racey PA. Effect of acoustic clutter on prey detection by bats. Nature. 2001;414(6865):742-745.
  10. Tyack PL, Clark CW. Communication and Acoustic Behavior of Dolphins and Whales. In: Au WWL, Fay RR, Popper AN, eds. Hearing by Whales and Dolphins. Springer Handbook of Auditory Research. New York, NY: Springer; 2000:156-224.
  11. Tandon N, Choudhury A. A review of vibration and acoustic measurement methods for the detection of defects in rolling element bearings. Tribology International. 1999;32(8):469-480.
  12. Krebs S. “ Dial Gauge versus Senses 1–0”: German Car Mechanics and the Introduction of New Diagnostic Equipment, 1950–1980. Technology and Culture. 2014:354-89.
  13. Allen E, Thallon R, Schreyer A, Iano J. Fundamentals of Residential Construction. Fourth edition. Hoboken, New Jersey:Wiley; 2018.
  14. Cranford JL. Basics of Audiology : From Vibrations to Sounds. San Diego, California: Plural Publishing, Inc; 2008.
  15. Kracht JM, Busch-Vishniac IJ, West JE. Noise in the operating rooms of Johns Hopkins Hospital. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2007;121(5):2673-80.
  16. Dodenhoff RM. Noise in the orthopaedic operating theatre. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1995;77(1 Suppl):8-9.
  17. Fritsch MH, Chacko CE, Patterson EB. Operating room sound level hazards for patients and physicians. Otol Neurotol. 2010;31(5):715-721.
  18. Kamal SA. Orthopaedic theatres: a possible noise hazard? J Laryngol Otol. 1982;96(11):985-990.
  19. Love H. Noise exposure in the orthopaedic operating theatre: a significant health hazard. ANZ J Surg. 2003;73(10):836-838.
  20. Mullett H, Synnott K, Quinlan W. Occupational noise levels in orthopaedic surgery. Ir J Med Sci. 1999;168(2):106.
  21. Nott MR, West PDB. Orthopaedic theatre noise: a potential hazard to patients. Anaesthesia. 2003;58(8):784-787.
  22. Willett KM. Noise-induced hearing loss in orthopaedic staff. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1991;73(1):113-115.
  23. Katz JD. Noise in the operating room. Anesthesiology: The Journal of the American Society of Anesthesiologists. 2014; 121(4):894-8.
  24. Way TJ, Long A, Weihing J, Ritchie R, Jones R, Bush M, et al. Effect of noise on auditory processing in the operating room. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 2013 May 1;216(5):933-8.
  25. Keller S, Tschan F, Beldi G, Kurmann A, Candinas D, Semmer NK. Noise peaks influence communication in the operating room. An observational study. Ergonomics. 2016;59(12):1541-52.
  26. Moorthy K, Munz Y, Undre S, Darzi A. Objective evaluation of the effect of noise on the performance of a complex laparoscopic task. Surgery. 2004; 136(1):25-30.
  27. Killion MC, Niquette PA, Gudmundsen GI, Revit LJ, Banerjee S. Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2004; 116(4):2395-405.
  28. Kam PC, Kam AC, Thompson JF. Noise pollution in the anaesthetic and intensive care environment. Anaesthesia. 1994; 49(11):982-6.
The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery
Volume 10, Issue 7
July 2022
Pages 561-567

  • Receive Date 24 November 2020
  • Revise Date 22 November 2021
  • Accept Date 13 December 2021