Incorporation of virtual reality in the clinical training of medical students studying esophageal and mediastinal anatomy and surgery

Imai, Takeharu; Tanaka, Yoshihiro; Hatanaka, Yuji; Suetsugu, Tomonari; Sato, Yuta; Matsuhashi, Nobuhisa; Tsunekawa, Koji; Saiki, Takuya; Yoshida, Kazuhiro

doi:10.1007/s00595-022-02457-z

Cited by 11 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Qualitative and quantitative outcomes reported by included studies are listed according to the learning determinant category. Results from these studies are summarized in “Statistical results” if they are supported by statistical analysis, or “Non-statistical results” if they are not Possible learning determinants count, n (%) Qualitative outcome measures Quantitative outcome measures Statistical results Non-statistical results Student perceptions 212121 (84) - Usefulness or efficiency for anatomy learning [ 21 , 22 , 35 – 37 , 39 , 42 – 44 , 46 , 48 , 49 , 54 , 55 ] - Enjoyment [ 21 , 22 , 32 , 35 , 42 , 43 , 46 , 49 , 52 ] - Ease of use [ 22 , 32 , 35 , 39 , 42 – 44 , 46 ] - Motivation [ 32 , 45 , 48 , 55 ] - Instructional Materials Motivation Survey [ 48 ] - Engagement or interest [ 45 , 48 – 50 ] - Ease of understanding [ 22 , 32 , 45 , 51 , 52 ] - Value - Revised Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire [ 55 ] - Preferen...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of Learning Anatomy in an Immersive Virtual Reality Environment — A Scoping Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the decline of cadavers as anatomy teaching tools, immersive virtual reality (VR) technology has gained popularity as a potential alternative. To better understand how to maximize the educational potential of VR, this scoping review aimed to identify potential determinants of learning anatomy in an immersive VR environment. A literature search yielded 4523 studies, 25 of which were included after screening. Six common factors were derived from secondary outcomes in these papers: cognitive load, cybersickness, student perceptions, stereopsis, spatial understanding, and interactivity. Further objective research investigating the impact of these factors on anatomy examination performance is required. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-022-01701-y.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of Learning Anatomy in an Immersive Virtual Reality Environment — A Scoping Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the field of anatomy, VR is highly accepted and has been shown to improve medical students’ skills in assessing and understanding computed tomography scans and interpreting surgical images. 39 In contrast, in a recent evaluation of robotic surgical skills learning on a VR-based platform, further improvements and expert knowledge were identified as needed before VR robotic training courses could be implemented in curricula. 39,40…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In the field of anatomy, VR is highly accepted and has been shown to improve medical students' skills in assessing and understanding computed tomography scans and interpreting surgical images. 39 In contrast, in a recent evaluation of robotic surgical skills learning on a VR-based platform, further improvements and expert knowledge were identified as needed before VR robotic training courses could be implemented in curricula. 39,40 In summary, VR technology has gained acceptance in diverse areas, such as in nursing schools, 40 as a support for oral hygiene in elderly/disabled people, 41 and as a replacement for demonstrations, especially if these methods do not have to be performed hands-on by participants later in their studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…39 In contrast, in a recent evaluation of robotic surgical skills learning on a VR-based platform, further improvements and expert knowledge were identified as needed before VR robotic training courses could be implemented in curricula. 39,40 In summary, VR technology has gained acceptance in diverse areas, such as in nursing schools, 40 as a support for oral hygiene in elderly/disabled people, 41 and as a replacement for demonstrations, especially if these methods do not have to be performed hands-on by participants later in their studies. To replace conventional training courses for more complex skills, where interaction and hands-on practice are mandatory, a further improvement in the technology is needed, and must be evaluated in terms of the competency to be acquired, before integration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Virtual Reality in Biomedical Education in the sense of the 3Rs

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Article 23(2) of EU Directive 2010/63 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes requires staff involved in the care and use of animals to be adequately educated and trained before carrying out procedures. Therefore, the 3Rs (refinement, reduction, and replacement) and knowledge of alternative methods should be part of the education and training itself. For this purpose, the digital learning concept “Virtual Reality (VR) in Biomedical Education” evolved, which successfully combines VR components with classical learning content. Procedures, such as anesthesia induction, substance application, and blood sampling in rats, as well as aspects of the laboratory environment were recorded in 360° videos. The generated VR teaching/learning modules (VR modules) were used to better prepare participants for hands-on training (refinement) or as a complete replacement for a live demonstration; thus, reducing the number of animals used for hands-on skills training (reduction). The current study evaluated users’ experience of the VR modules. Despite little previous VR experience, participants strongly appreciated the VR modules and indicated that they believed VR has the potential to enhance delivery of procedures and demonstrations. Interestingly, participants with previous experience of laboratory animal science were more convinced about VR’s potential to support the 3Rs principle, and endorsed its use for further educational purposes. In conclusion, VR appeared to be highly accepted as a learning/teaching method, indicating its great potential to further replace and reduce the use of animals in experimental animal courses.

show abstract

Immersive virtual reality and augmented reality in anatomy education: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

García‐Robles,

Cortés‐Pérez,

Nieto‐Escámez

et al. 2024

Anatomical Sciences Ed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this review was to (1) analyze the effectiveness of immersive virtual reality (iVR) and augmented reality (AR) as teaching/learning resources (collectively called XR‐technologies) for gaining anatomy knowledge compared to traditional approaches and (2) gauge students' perceptions of the usefulness of these technologies as learning tools. This meta‐analysis, previously registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023423017), followed PRISMA guidelines. A systematic bibliographical search, without time parameters, was conducted through four databases until June 2023. A meta‐analytic approach investigated knowledge gains and XR's usefulness for learning. Pooled effect sizes were estimated using Cohen's standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). A single‐group proportional meta‐analysis was conducted to quantify the percentage of students who considered XR devices useful for their learning. Twenty‐seven experimental studies, reporting data from 2199 health sciences students, were included for analysis. XR‐technologies yielded higher knowledge gains than traditional approaches (SMD = 0.40; 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.60), especially when used as supplemental/complementary learning resources (SMD = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.40 to 0.63). Specifically, knowledge performance using XR devices outperformed textbooks and atlases (SMD = 0.32; 95% CI = 0.10 to 0.54) and didactic lectures (SMD = 1.00; 95% CI = 0.57 to 1.42), especially among undergraduate students (SMD = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.20 to 0.62). XR devices were perceived to be more useful for learning than traditional approaches (SMD = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.04 to 1), and 80% of all students who used XR devices reported these devices as useful for learning anatomy. Learners using XR technologies demonstrated increased anatomy knowledge gains and considered these technologies useful for learning anatomy.

show abstract

Incorporation of virtual reality in the clinical training of medical students studying esophageal and mediastinal anatomy and surgery

Cited by 11 publications

References 21 publications

Determinants of Learning Anatomy in an Immersive Virtual Reality Environment — A Scoping Review

Determinants of Learning Anatomy in an Immersive Virtual Reality Environment — A Scoping Review

Virtual Reality in Biomedical Education in the sense of the 3Rs

Immersive virtual reality and augmented reality in anatomy education: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About