Dataset Information

Is individual practice in an immersive and interactive virtual reality application non-inferior to practicing with traditional equipment in learning systematic clinical observation? A randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The aim was to investigate if individual self-practice of the ABCDE approach (Airways, Breathing, Circulation, Disability, Exposure) in an immersive and interactive virtual reality (VR) application gave non-inferior learning outcome compared to using traditional equipment (TP) in first year medical and nursing students. METHODS:A non-inferior parallel group randomized controlled trial. The study was linked to a regular teaching program conducted in August and September 2019. All students participated in a 15-min ABCDE introduction session, before they self-practiced the ABCDE approach for 20?min in either a fully immersive and interactive VR application using hand controllers with some haptic feedback (Individual VR) or with blood pressure gauge, ear-thermometer and oximeter (Individual TP). The primary outcome was the number of students who documented all the eight predefined observations in the ABCDE approach in the correct order in a practical test on an advanced simulator manikin with a time limit of 5?min, done immediately after the self-practice. The predefined one-sided non-inferiority limit was 13% points. RESULTS:Of all eligible students, 84% participated in the study and randomly allocated to VR (n?=?149) or TP (n?=?140). The primary outcome showed non-inferiority of the VR application with 24.8% in individual VR doing all observations in correct order compared to 27.1% TP (absolute difference 2.3% points, one sided 95% CI 2.3 to 10.8). The secondary outcomes were similar between the groups, but more students in VR reported liking the way they practiced (absolute difference 46% points, 95% CI 36.5 to 56.6) and that it was a good way to learn (36.9% points, 95% CI 26.8 to 47). VR also scored high on the System Usability Scale (mean difference 6.4% points, 95% CI 2.8-10.1). CONCLUSIONS:Individual self-practicing the ABCDE approach in VR was non-inferior to individual self-practicing with traditional equipment.

SUBMITTER: Berg H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7181571 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is individual practice in an immersive and interactive virtual reality application non-inferior to practicing with traditional equipment in learning systematic clinical observation? A randomized controlled trial.

Berg Helen H Steinsbekk Aslak A

BMC medical education 20200422 1

<h4>Background</h4>The aim was to investigate if individual self-practice of the ABCDE approach (Airways, Breathing, Circulation, Disability, Exposure) in an immersive and interactive virtual reality (VR) application gave non-inferior learning outcome compared to using traditional equipment (TP) in first year medical and nursing students.<h4>Methods</h4>A non-inferior parallel group randomized controlled trial. The study was linked to a regular teaching program conducted in August and September ...[more]

PMID: 32326948

Similar Datasets

Project description:Many university-taught courses moved to online form since the outbreak of the global pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Distance learning has become broadly used as a result of the widely applied lockdowns, however, many students lack personal contact in the learning process. A classical web-based distance learning does not provide means for natural interpersonal interaction. The technology of immersive virtual reality (iVR) may mitigate this problem. Current research has been aimed mainly at specific instances of collaborative immersive virtual environment (CIVE) applications for learning. The fields utilizing iVR for knowledge construction and skills training with the use of spatial visualizations show promising results. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of collaborative and individual use of iVR for learning geography, specifically training in hypsography. Furthermore, the study's goals were to determine whether collaborative learning would be more effective and to investigate the key elements in which collaborative and individual learning were expected to differ-motivation and use of cognitive resources. The CIVE application developed at Masaryk University was utilized to train 80 participants in inferring conclusions from cartographic visualizations. The collaborative and individual experimental group underwent a research procedure consisting of a pretest, training in iVR, posttest, and questionnaires. A statistical comparison between the geography pretest and posttest for the individual learning showed a significant increase in the score (p = 0.024, ES = 0.128) and speed (p = 0.027, ES = 0.123), while for the collaborative learning, there was a significant increase in the score (p<0.001, ES = 0.333) but not in speed (p = 1.000, ES = 0.000). Thus, iVR as a medium proved to be an effective tool for learning geography. However, comparing the collaborative and individual learning showed no significant difference in the learning gain (p = 0.303, ES = 0.115), speed gain (p = 0.098, ES = 0.185), or performance motivation (p = 0.368, ES = 0.101). Nevertheless, the collaborative learning group had significantly higher use of cognitive resources (p = 0.046, ES = 0.223) than the individual learning group. The results were discussed in relation to the cognitive load theories, and future research directions for iVR learning were proposed.

Project description:PurposeNon-pharmacologic adjuncts to opioid analgesics for burn wound debridement enhance safety and cost effectiveness in care. The current study explored the feasibility of using a custom portable water-friendly immersive VR hardware during burn debridement in adults, and tested whether interactive VR would reduce pain more effectively than nature stimuli viewed in the same VR goggles.MethodsForty-eight patients with severe burn injuries (44 adults and 4 children) had their burn injuries debrided and dressed in a wet wound care environment on Study Day 1, and 13 also participated in Study Day 2.InterventionThe study used a within-subject design to test two hypotheses (one hypothesis per study day) with the condition order randomized. On Study Day 1, each individual (n = 44 participants) spent 5 min of wound care in an interactive immersive VR environment designed for burn care, and 5 min looking at still nature photos and sounds of nature in the same VR goggles. On Study Day 2 (n = 12 adult participants and one adolescent from Day 1), each participant spent 5 min of burn wound care with no distraction and 5 min of wound care in VR, using a new water-friendly VR system. On both days, during a post-wound care assessment, participants rated and compared the pain they had experienced in each condition. OUTCOME MEASURES ON STUDY DAYS 1 AND 2: Worst pain during burn wound care was the primary dependent variable. Secondary measures were ratings of time spent thinking about pain during wound care, pain unpleasantness, and positive affect during wound care.ResultsOn Study Day 1, no significant differences in worst pain ratings during wound care were found between the computer-generated world (Mean = 71.06, SD = 26.86) vs. Nature pictures conditions (Mean = 68.19, SD = 29.26; t < 1, NS). On secondary measures, positive affect (fun) was higher, and realism was lower during computer-generated VR. No significant differences in pain unpleasantness or "presence in VR" between the two conditions were found, however. VR VS. NO VR. (STUDY DAY 2): Participants reported significantly less worst pain when distracted with adjunctive computer generated VR than during standard wound care without distraction (Mean = 54.23, SD = 26.13 vs 63.85, SD = 31.50, t(11) = 1.91, p < .05, SD = 17.38). In addition, on Study Day 2, "time spent thinking about pain during wound care" was significantly less during the VR condition, and positive affect was significantly greater during VR, compared to the No VR condition.ConclusionThe current study is innovative in that it is the first to show the feasibility of using a custom portable water-friendly immersive VR hardware during burn debridement in adults. However, contrary to predictions, interactive VR did not reduce pain more effectively than nature stimuli viewed in the same VR goggles.

Dataset Information

Is individual practice in an immersive and interactive virtual reality application non-inferior to practicing with traditional equipment in learning systematic clinical observation? A randomized controlled trial.

Publications

Is individual practice in an immersive and interactive virtual reality application non-inferior to practicing with traditional equipment in learning systematic clinical observation? A randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets