As standard practice in orthopedic surgery, the information gathered by analyzing Computer Tomography (CT) 2D images is used for patient diagnosis and planning surgery. Lately, these virtual slices are the input for generating 3D virtual models using DICOM viewers, facilitating spatial orientation, and diagnosis. Virtual Reality (VR) and 3D printing (3DP) technologies are also reported for use in anatomy visualization, medical training, and diagnosis. However, it has not been yet investigated whether the surgeons consider that the advantages offered by 3DP and VR outweigh their development efforts. Moreover, no comparative evaluation for understanding surgeon's preference in using these investigation tools has been performed so far. Therefore, in this paper, a pilot usability test was conducted for collecting surgeons' opinions. 3D models of knee, hip and foot were displayed using DICOM 3D viewer, two VR environments and as 3D-printed replicas. These tools adequacy for diagnosis was comparatively assessed in three cases scenarios, the time for completing the diagnosis tasks was recorded and questionnaires filled in. The time for preparing the models for VR and 3DP, the resources needed and the associated costs were presented in order to provide surgeons with the whole context. Results showed a preference in using desktop DICOM viewer with 3D capabilities along with the information provided by Unity-based VR solution for visualizing the virtual model from various angles challenging to analyze on the computer screen. 3D-printed replicas were considered more useful for physically simulating the surgery than for diagnosis. For the VR and 3DP models, the lack of information on bone quality was considered an important drawback. The following order of using the tools was preferred: DICOM viewer, followed by Unity VR and 3DP.
Keywords: 3D printing; DICOM 3D viewer; Orthopedics diagnosis; cost-benefit ratio; usability test; virtual reality.