The use of Virtual Environments has been widely reported as a method of teaching anatomy. Generally such environments only convey the shape of the anatomy to the student. We present the Bangor Augmented Reality Education Tool for Anatomy (BARETA), a system that combines Augmented Reality (AR) technology with models produced using Rapid Prototyping (RP) technology, to provide the student with stimulation for touch as well as sight. The principal aims of this work were to provide an interface more intuitive than a mouse and keyboard, and to evaluate such a system as a viable supplement to traditional cadaver based education.

Aims:  To create and evaluate a virtual reality (VR) microscope that is as efficient as the conventional microscope, seeking to support the introduction of digital slides into routine practice. Methods and results:  A VR microscope was designed and implemented by combining ultra‐high‐resolution displays with VR technology, techniques for fast interaction, and high usability. It was evaluated using a mixed factorial experimental design with technology and task as within‐participant variables and grade of histopathologist as a between‐participant variable. Time to diagnosis was similar for the conventional and VR microscopes. However, there was a significant difference in the mean magnification used between the two technologies, with participants working at a higher level of magnification on the VR microscope. Conclusions:  The results suggest that, with the right technology, efficient use of digital pathology for routine practice is a realistic possibility. Further work is required to explore what magnification is required on the VR microscope for histopathologists to identify diagnostic features, and the effect on this of the digital slide production process.

Summary:Digital pathology promises a number of benefits in efficiency in surgical pathology, yet the longer time required to review a virtual slide than a glass slide currently represents a significant barrier to the routine use of digital pathology. We aimed to create a novel workstation that enables pathologists to view a case as quickly as on the conventional microscope. The Leeds Virtual Microscope (LVM) was evaluated using a mixed factorial experimental design. Twelve consultant pathologists took part, each viewing one long cancer case (12-25 slides) on the LVM and one on a conventional microscope. Total time taken and diagnostic confidence were similar for the microscope and LVM, as was the mean slide viewing time. On the LVM, participants spent a significantly greater proportion of the total task time viewing slides and revisited slides more often. The unique design of the LVM, enabling real time rendering of virtual slides while providing users with a quick and intuitive way to navigate within and between slides, makes use of digital pathology in routine practice a realistic possibility. With further practice with the system, diagnostic efficiency on the LVM is likely to increase yet more.3

Performing diagnoses using virtual slides can take pathologists significantly longer than with glass slides, presenting a significant barrier to the use of virtual slides in routine practice. Given the benefits in pathology workflow efficiency and safety that virtual slides promise, it is important to understand reasons for this difference and identify opportunities for improvement. The effect of display resolution on time to diagnosis with virtual slides has not previously been explored. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of display resolution on time to diagnosis with virtual slides. Nine pathologists participated in a counterbalanced crossover study, viewing axillary lymph node slides on a microscope, a 23-in 2.3-megapixel single-screen display and a three-screen 11-megapixel display consisting of three 27-in displays. Time to diagnosis and time to first target were faster on the microscope than on the single and three-screen displays. There was no significant difference between the microscope and the three-screen display in time to first target, while the time taken on the single-screen display was significantly higher than that on the microscope. The results suggest that a digital pathology workstation with an increased number of pixels may make it easier to identify where cancer is located in the initial slide overview, enabling quick location of diagnostically relevant regions of interest. However, when a comprehensive, detailed search of a slide has to be made, increased resolution may not offer any additional benefit.

Aims: To study the current work practice of histopathologists in order to inform the design of digital microscopy systems.Methods and results: 4 gastrointestinal histopathologists were video recorded as they undertook their routine work. Analysis of the video data shows a range of activities beyond viewing slides involved in reporting a case. There is much overlapping of activities,The order and timing of activities varies according to consultant. Conclusions:In order to adequately support the work of pathologists, digital microscopy systems need to provide support for a range of activities beyond viewing slides. Digital microscopy systems should support multitasking, while also providing flexibility so that pathologists can adapt their use of the technology to their own working patterns.3