Dataset Information

Use of 360° virtual reality video in medical obstetrical education: a quasi-experimental design.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Video-based teaching has been part of medical education for some time but 360° videos using a virtual reality (VR) device are a new medium that offer extended possibilities. We investigated whether adding a 360° VR video to the internship curriculum leads to an improvement of long-term recall of specific knowledge on a gentle Caesarean Sections (gCS) and on general obstetric knowledge.

Methods

Two weeks prior to their Obstetrics and Gynaecology (O&G) internship, medical students were divided in teaching groups, that did or did not have access to a VR-video of a gCS. Six weeks after their O&G internship, potentially having observed one or multiple real-life CSs, knowledge on the gCS was assessed with an open questionnaire, and knowledge on general obstetrics with a multiple-choice questionnaire. Furthermore we assessed experienced anxiety during in-person attendance of CSs, and we asked whether the interns would have wanted to attend more CSs in-person. The 360° VR video group was questioned about their experience directly after they watched the video. We used linear regression analyses to determine significant effects on outcomes.

Results

A total of 89 medical students participated, 41 in the 360° VR video group and 48 in the conventional study group. Watching the 360° VR video did not result in a difference in either specific or general knowledge retention between the intervention group and the conventional study group. This was both true for the grade received for the internship, the open-ended questions as well as the multiple-choice questions and this did not change after adjustment for confounding factors. Still, 83.4% of the 360° VR video-group reported that more videos should be used in training to prepare for surgical procedures. In the 360° VR video-group 56.7% reported side effects like nausea or dizziness. After adjustment for the number of attended CSs during the practical internship, students in the 360° VR video-group stated less often (p = 0.04) that they would have liked to attend more CSs in-person as compared to the conventional study group.

Conclusion

Even though the use of 360° VR video did not increase knowledge, it did offer a potential alternative for attending a CS in-person and a new way to prepare the students for their first operating room experiences.

SUBMITTER: Arents V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8035054 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThe need for remote delivery of mental health interventions including instruction in meditation has become paramount in the wake of the current global pandemic. However, the support one may usually feel within the physical presence of an instructor may be weakened when interventions are delivered remotely, potentially impacting one's meditative experiences. Use of head-mounted displays (HMD) to display video-recorded instruction may increase one's sense of psychological presence with the instructor as compared to presentation via regular flatscreen (e.g., laptop) monitor. This research therefore evaluated a didactic, trauma-informed care approach to instruction in mindfulness meditation by comparing meditative responses to an instructor-guided meditation when delivered face-to-face vs. by pre-recorded 360° videos viewed either on a standard flatscreen monitor (2D format) or via HMD (i.e., virtual reality [VR] headset; 3D format).MethodsYoung adults (n = 82) were recruited from a university introductory course and experienced a 360° video-guided meditation via HMD (VR condition, 3D format). They were also randomly assigned to practice the same meditation either via scripted face-to-face instruction (in vivo [IV] format) or when viewed on a standard laptop display (non-VR condition, 2D format). Positive and negative affect and meditative experience ratings were self-reported and participants' maintenance of focused attention to breathing (i.e., meditation breath attention scores [MBAS]) were recorded during each meditation.ResultsMeditating in VR (3D format) was associated with a heightened experience of awe overall. When compared to face-to-face instruction (IV format), VR meditation was rated as less embarrassing but also less enjoyable and more tiring. When compared to 2D format, VR meditations were associated with greater experiences of relaxation, less distractibility from the process of breathing, and less fatigue. No differences were found between VR and non-VR meditation in concentration (MBAS). Baseline posttraumatic stress symptoms were risk factors for experiencing distress while meditating in either (VR and non-VR) instructional format. Of those who reported a preference for one format, approximately half preferred the VR format and approximately half preferred the IV format.ConclusionsRecorded 360° video instruction in meditation viewed with a HMD (i.e., VR/3D format) appears to offer some experiential advantage over instructions given in 2D format and may offer a safe-and for some even preferred-alternative to teaching meditation face-to-face.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12671-021-01612-w.

Project description:BackgroundLearning through a 360° virtual reality (VR) or 2D video represents an alternative way to learn a complex medical education task. However, there is currently no consensus on how best to assess the effects of different learning materials on cognitive load estimates, heart rate variability (HRV), outcomes, and experience in learning history taking and physical examination (H&P) skills.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate how learning materials (ie, VR or 2D video) impact learning outcomes and experience through changes in cognitive load estimates and HRV for learning H&P skills.MethodsThis pilot system-design study included 32 undergraduate medical students at an academic teaching hospital. The students were randomly assigned, with a 1:1 allocation, to a 360° VR video group or a 2D video group, matched by age, sex, and cognitive style. The contents of both videos were different with regard to visual angle and self-determination. Learning outcomes were evaluated using the Milestone reporting form. Subjective and objective cognitive loads were estimated using the Paas Cognitive Load Scale, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index, and secondary-task reaction time. Cardiac autonomic function was assessed using HRV measurements. Learning experience was assessed using the AttrakDiff2 questionnaire and qualitative feedback. Statistical significance was accepted at a two-sided P value of <.01.ResultsAll 32 participants received the intended intervention. The sample consisted of 20 (63%) males and 12 (38%) females, with a median age of 24 (IQR 23-25) years. The 360° VR video group seemed to have a higher Milestone level than the 2D video group (P=.04). The reaction time at the 10th minute in the 360° VR video group was significantly higher than that in the 2D video group (P<.001). Multiple logistic regression models of the overall cohort showed that the 360° VR video module was independently and positively associated with a reaction time at the 10th minute of ≥3.6 seconds (exp B=18.8, 95% CI 3.2-110.8; P=.001) and a Milestone level of ≥3 (exp B=15.0, 95% CI 2.3-99.6; P=.005). However, a reaction time at the 10th minute of ≥3.6 seconds was not related to a Milestone level of ≥3. A low-frequency to high-frequency ratio between the 5th and 10th minute of ≥1.43 seemed to be inversely associated with a hedonic stimulation score of ≥2.0 (exp B=0.14, 95% CI 0.03-0.68; P=.015) after adjusting for video module. The main qualitative feedback indicated that the 360° VR video module was fun but caused mild dizziness, whereas the 2D video module was easy to follow but tedious.ConclusionsOur preliminary results showed that 360° VR video learning may be associated with a better Milestone level than 2D video learning, and that this did not seem to be related to cognitive load estimates or HRV indexes in the novice learners. Of note, an increase in sympathovagal balance may have been associated with a lower hedonic stimulation score, which may have met the learners' needs and prompted learning through the different video modules.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03501641; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03501641.

Project description:BackgroundClinical practice in neonatal intensive care units for nursing college students has been restricted due to the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak; thus, the gamification program has emerged as an alternative learning method. Consequently, there is a need to examine the effectiveness of such alternative learning methods to enhance the response to high-risk newborn emergencies.ObjectivesTo examine the effects (neonatal resuscitation nursing knowledge, problem-solving and clinical reasoning ability, self-confidence in practical performance, degree of anxiety, and learning motivation) of a neonatal resuscitation gamification program using immersive virtual reality based on Keller's ARCS model.DesignA non-randomized controlled simulation study with a pretest-posttest design.SettingLab and lecture rooms of two universities in South Korea, from June to November 2021.ParticipantsPrelicensure nursing students.MethodsThe virtual reality group (n = 29) underwent a neonatal resuscitation gamification program using virtual reality based on Keller's ARCS model. The simulation group (n = 28) received high-fidelity neonatal resuscitation simulations and online neonatal resuscitation program lectures. The control group (n = 26) only received online neonatal resuscitation program lectures. Changes in scores among these groups were compared using analysis of variance and analysis of covariance with SPSS for Windows version 27.0.ResultsPost intervention, neonatal resuscitation knowledge [F(2) = 3.83, p = .004] and learning motivation [F(2) = 1.79, p = .025] were significantly higher in the virtual reality and simulation groups than in the control group, whereas problem-solving ability [F(2) = 2.07, p = .038] and self-confidence [F(2) = 6.53, p < .001] were significantly higher in the virtual reality group than in the simulation and control groups. Anxiety [F(2) = 16.14, p < .001] was significantly lower in the simulation group than in the virtual reality and control groups.ConclusionsThe neonatal resuscitation gamification program using immersive virtual reality was found to be effective in increasing neonatal resuscitation knowledge, problem-solving ability, self-confidence, and learning motivation of the nursing students who participated in the trial application process.

Project description:BackgroundAugmented reality (AR), mixed reality (MR), and virtual reality (VR), realized as head-mounted devices (HMDs), may open up new ways of teaching medical content for low-resource settings. The advantages are that HMDs enable repeated practice without adverse effects on the patient in various medical disciplines; may introduce new ways to learn complex medical content; and may alleviate financial, ethical, and supervisory constraints on the use of traditional medical learning materials, like cadavers and other skills lab equipment.ObjectiveWe examine the effectiveness of AR, MR, and VR HMDs for medical education, whereby we aim to incorporate a global health perspective comprising low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodsWe conducted a systematic review according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) and Cochrane guidelines. Seven medical databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Science Direct, PsycINFO, Education Resources Information Centre, and Google Scholar) were searched for peer-reviewed publications from January 1, 2014, to May 31, 2019. An extensive search was carried out to examine relevant literature guided by three concepts of extended reality (XR), which comprises the concepts of AR, MR, and VR, and the concepts of medicine and education. It included health professionals who took part in an HMD intervention that was compared to another teaching or learning method and evaluated with regard to its effectiveness. Quality and risk of bias were assessed with the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale-Education, and A Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions. We extracted relevant data and aggregated the data according to the main outcomes of this review (knowledge, skills, and XR HMD).ResultsA total of 27 studies comprising 956 study participants were included. The participants included all types of health care professionals, especially medical students (n=573, 59.9%) and residents (n=289, 30.2%). AR and VR implemented with HMDs were most often used for training in the fields of surgery (n=13, 48%) and anatomy (n=4, 15%). A range of study designs were used, and quantitative methods were clearly dominant (n=21, 78%). Training with AR- and VR-based HMDs was perceived as salient, motivating, and engaging. In the majority of studies (n=17, 63%), HMD-based interventions were found to be effective. A small number of included studies (n=4, 15%) indicated that HMDs were effective for certain aspects of medical skills and knowledge learning and training, while other studies suggested that HMDs were only viable as an additional teaching tool (n=4, 15%). Only 2 (7%) studies found no effectiveness in the use of HMDs.ConclusionsThe majority of included studies suggested that XR-based HMDs have beneficial effects for medical education, whereby only a minority of studies were from LMICs. Nevertheless, as most studies showed at least noninferior results when compared to conventional teaching and training, the results of this review suggest applicability and potential effectiveness in LMICs. Overall, users demonstrated greater enthusiasm and enjoyment in learning with XR-based HMDs. It has to be noted that many HMD-based interventions were small-scale and conducted as short-term pilots. To generate relevant evidence in the future, it is key to rigorously evaluate XR-based HMDs with AR and VR implementations, particularly in LMICs, to better understand the strengths and shortcomings of HMDs for medical education.