InNervate AR: Dynamic Interaction System for Motor Nerve Anatomy Education in Augmented Reality

Scoping review: The use of augmented reality in clinical anatomical education and its assessment tools

“…Unlike other AR modalities, mobile device AR does not limit the user to the context of a classroom or operating room and provides freedom for the user to review at home. Of the 23 studies using mobile AR, 18 studies used mobile devices/tablets (Jamali et al, 2015; Ochoa‐Casas et al, 2015; Rodriguez‐Pardo et al, 2015; Küçük et al, 2016; da Silva et al, 2017; Moro et al, 2017; Aebersold et al, 2018; Cabero et al, 2018; Kurniawan & Witjaksono, 2018; Layona et al, 2018; Nuanmeesri, 2018; Acosta et al, 2019; Alenezi, 2019; Cook et al, 2019; Khalid et al, 2019; Loucif et al, 2019; Nuanmeesri et al, 2019; Henssen et al, 2020) and five used a computer (Thomas et al, 2010; Pérez‐López & Contero, 2013; Ferrer‐Torregrosa et al, 2015, 2016; Boonbrahm et al, 2018). Some studies described scanning images on anatomy textbooks (Jamali et al, 2015; Küçük et al, 2016; Nuanmeesri, 2018) or cards (Ferrer‐Torregrosa et al, 2015).…”

“…A variety of knowledge testing designs were used across the included studies. Many of these investigations conducted knowledge pretests to ascertain a baseline knowledge that could be compared to knowledge acquired following the use of AR modality (Pérez‐López & Contero, 2013; Siff & Mehta, 2018; Barmaki et al, 2019; Cook et al, 2019; Ferdous et al, 2019; Nuanmeesri et al, 2019; Weeks & Amiel, 2019; Gonzalez et al, 2020; Henssen et al, 2020; Duncan‐Vaidya & Stevenson, 2021). In contrast, other investigations opted to use a post‐test‐only design in which control and experimental groups were compared against their final knowledge scores (Ferrer‐Torregrosa et al, 2016; Alenezi, 2019; Barmaki et al, 2019; Bogomolova et al, 2020; Ruthberg et al, 2020).…”

“…Negative feedback received was primarily related to technical difficulties with the AR system itself (Rochlen et al, 2017). Similarly, the focus of many other investigations included investigating the positive aspects, negative aspects, perceived barriers, and suggestions for improvement to the AR device they interacted with (Moro et al, 2017; Aebersold et al, 2018; Rojas‐Munoz et al, 2019; Bork et al, 2019; Cook et al, 2019; Weeks & Amiel, 2019). Kugelmann et al (2018) asked students, at the end of their usability questionnaire, to fill out qualitative feedback about their experience using the AR Magic Mirror system and to provide suggestions for future improvement to the application.…”

“…Most users, regardless of the AR modality, described their AR experience as enjoyable with increased motivation (Johnson & Sun, 2013; Pauly et al, 2015; Ferrer‐Torregrosa, et al, 2015; Jamali et al, 2015; Ma et al, 2016; da Silva et al, 2017; Manrique‐Juan et al, 2017; Moro et al, 2017; Rochlen et al, 2017; Aebersold et al, 2018; Boonbrahm et al, 2018; Kelly et al, 2018; Kugelmann et al, 2018; Layona et al, 2018; Nørgård et al, 2018; Alenezi, 2019; Cabero‐Almenara & Roig‐Vila, 2019; Cook et al, 2019; Khalid et al, 2019; Si et al, 2019; Wish‐Baratz et al, 2019; Bogomolova et al, 2020; Gonzalez et al, 2020; Duncan‐Vaidya & Stevenson, 2021). The results surrounding survey items assessing usability of the device, however, were seemingly more divided among studies in addition to the AR modalities themselves.…”

The Effectiveness of Collaborative Augmented Reality in Gross Anatomy Teaching: A Quantitative and Qualitative Pilot Study

“…Handheld AR systems typically superimpose virtual content onto the live camera stream of a mobile device such as a smartphone or tablet, which combine computational power, a display, as well as interaction technology in one single device. Several handheld AR systems have been proposed for various areas of medical education, including neuroanatomy (Cook et al, 2019; Henssen et al, 2020), the anatomy of the musculoskeletal system (Chien et al, 2010; Jamali et al, 2015), the pelvis (Dixit et al, 2019), as well as for general anatomical education (Küçük et al, 2016; Wang et al, 2016; Jain et al, 2017; Kurniawan et al, 2018; Khalid et al, 2019). Recently, Moro et al (2017) presented a comparative study that investigated the impact of a mobile AR system in comparison to VR and tablet‐based systems on anatomy learning outcome.…”