Dataset Information

Immersive virtual reality (VR) training increases the self-efficacy of in-hospital healthcare providers and patient families regarding tracheostomy-related knowledge and care skills: A prospective pre-post study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Virtual reality (VR)-based simulation in hospital settings facilitates the acquisition of skills without compromising patient safety. Despite regular text-based training, a baseline survey of randomly selected healthcare providers revealed deficiencies in their knowledge, confidence, comfort, and care skills regarding tracheostomy. This prospective pre-post study compared the effectiveness of regular text- and VR-based intervention modules in training healthcare providers' self-efficacy in tracheostomy care skills.

Methods

Between January 2018 and January 2020, 60 healthcare providers, including physicians, nurses, and respiratory therapists, were enrolled. For the intervention, a newly developed head-mounted display (HMD) and web VR materials were implemented in training and clinical services. Subsequently, in-hospital healthcare providers were trained using either text or head-mounted display virtual reality (HMD-VR) materials in the regular and intervention modules, respectively. For tracheostomy care skills, preceptors directly audited the performance of trainees and provided feedback.

Results

At baseline, the degree of trainees' agreement with the self-efficacy-related statements, including the aspects of familiarity, confidence, and anxiety about tracheostomy-related knowledge and care skills, were not different between the control and intervention groups. At follow-up stage, compared with the regular group, a higher percentage of intervention group' trainees reported that they are "strongly agree" or "somewhat agree" that the HMD-VR simulation increases their self-efficacy, including the aspects of familiarity and confidence, and reduced their anxiety about tracheostomy-related knowledge and care skills. After implementation, a higher degree of trainees' average satisfaction with VR-based training and VR materials was observed in the intervention group than in the regular group. Most reported that VR materials enabled accurate messaging and decreased anxiety. The increasing trend of the average written test and hands-on tracheostomy care skills scores among the intervention group trainees was significant compared to those in the regular group. The benefits of HMD-VR simulations and web-VR material-based clinical services for in-hospital healthcare providers and patient families persisted until 3 to 4 weeks later.

Conclusion

The current study suggests that VR materials significantly enhance trainees' self-efficacy (increased familiarity, increased confidence, and reduced anxiety) and their satisfaction with the training, while motivating them to use acquired knowledge and skills in clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Chiang DH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8757958 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceVideo learning prior to surgery is common practice for trainees and surgeons, and immersive virtual reality (IVR) simulators are of increasing interest for surgical training. The training effectiveness of IVR compared with video training in complex skill acquisition should be studied.ObjectivesTo evaluate whether IVR improves learning effectiveness for surgical trainees and to validate a VR rating scale through correlation to real-world performance.Design, setting, and participantsThis block randomized, intervention-controlled clinical trial included senior (ie, postgraduate year 4 and 5) orthopedic surgery residents from multiple institutions in Canada during a single training course. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed. Data were collected from January 30 to February 1, 2020.InterventionAn IVR training platform providing a case-based module for reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for advanced rotator cuff tear arthropathy. Participants were permitted to repeat the module indefinitely.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome measure was a validated performance metric for both the intervention and control groups (Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills [OSATS]). Secondary measures included transfer of training (ToT), transfer effectiveness ratio (TER), and cost-effectiveness (CER) ratios of IVR training compared with control. Additional secondary measures included IVR performance metrics measured on a novel rating scale compared with real-world performance.ResultsA total of 18 senior surgical residents participated; 9 (50%) were randomized to the IVR group and 9 (50%) to the control group. Participant demographic characteristics were not different for age (mean [SD] age: IVR group, 31.1 [2.8] years; control group, 31.0 [2.7] years), gender (IVR group, 8 [89%] men; control group, 6 [67%] men), surgical experience (mean [SD] experience with RSA: IVR group, 3.3 [0.9]; control group, 3.2 [0.4]), or prior simulator use (had experience: IVR group 6 [67%]; control group, 4 [44%]). The IVR group completed training 387% faster considering a single repetition (mean [SD] time for IVR group: 4.1 [2.5] minutes; mean [SD] time for control group: 16.1 [2.6] minutes; difference, 12.0 minutes; 95% CI, 8.8-14.0 minutes; P < .001). The IVR group had significantly better mean (SD) OSATS scores than the control group (15.9 [2.5] vs 9.4 [3.2]; difference, 6.9; 95% CI, 3.3-9.7; P < .001). The IVR group also demonstrated higher mean (SD) verbal questioning scores (4.1 [1.0] vs 2.2 [1.7]; difference, 1.9; 95% CI, 0.1-3.3; P = .03). The IVR score (ie, Precision Score) had a strong correlation to real-world OSATS scores (r = 0.74) and final implant position (r = 0.73). The ToT was 59.4%, based on the OSATS score. The TER was 0.79, and the system was 34 times more cost-effective than control, based on CER.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, surgical training with IVR demonstrated superior learning efficiency, knowledge, and skill transfer. The TER of 0.79 substituted for 47.4 minutes of operating room time when IVR was used for 60 minutes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04404010.