Virtual Reality for Health Professions Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration

Bhone Myint Kyaw, Nakul Saxena, Pawel Posadzki, Jitka Vseteckova, Charoula Konstantia Nikolaou, Pradeep Paul George, Ushashree Divakar, Italo Masiello, Andrzej A Kononowicz, Nabil Zary, Lorainne Tudor Car, Bhone Myint Kyaw, Nakul Saxena, Pawel Posadzki, Jitka Vseteckova, Charoula Konstantia Nikolaou, Pradeep Paul George, Ushashree Divakar, Italo Masiello, Andrzej A Kononowicz, Nabil Zary, Lorainne Tudor Car

Abstract

Background: Virtual reality (VR) is a technology that allows the user to explore and manipulate computer-generated real or artificial three-dimensional multimedia sensory environments in real time to gain practical knowledge that can be used in clinical practice.

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of VR for educating health professionals and improving their knowledge, cognitive skills, attitudes, and satisfaction.

Methods: We performed a systematic review of the effectiveness of VR in pre- and postregistration health professions education following the gold standard Cochrane methodology. We searched 7 databases from the year 1990 to August 2017. No language restrictions were applied. We included randomized controlled trials and cluster-randomized trials. We independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, and then, we compared the information in pairs. We contacted authors of the studies for additional information if necessary. All pooled analyses were based on random-effects models. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach to rate the quality of the body of evidence.

Results: A total of 31 studies (2407 participants) were included. Meta-analysis of 8 studies found that VR slightly improves postintervention knowledge scores when compared with traditional learning (standardized mean difference [SMD]=0.44; 95% CI 0.18-0.69; I2=49%; 603 participants; moderate certainty evidence) or other types of digital education such as online or offline digital education (SMD=0.43; 95% CI 0.07-0.79; I2=78%; 608 participants [8 studies]; low certainty evidence). Another meta-analysis of 4 studies found that VR improves health professionals' cognitive skills when compared with traditional learning (SMD=1.12; 95% CI 0.81-1.43; I2=0%; 235 participants; large effect size; moderate certainty evidence). Two studies compared the effect of VR with other forms of digital education on skills, favoring the VR group (SMD=0.5; 95% CI 0.32-0.69; I2=0%; 467 participants; moderate effect size; low certainty evidence). The findings for attitudes and satisfaction were mixed and inconclusive. None of the studies reported any patient-related outcomes, behavior change, as well as unintended or adverse effects of VR. Overall, the certainty of evidence according to the GRADE criteria ranged from low to moderate. We downgraded our certainty of evidence primarily because of the risk of bias and/or inconsistency.

Conclusions: We found evidence suggesting that VR improves postintervention knowledge and skills outcomes of health professionals when compared with traditional education or other types of digital education such as online or offline digital education. The findings on other outcomes are limited. Future research should evaluate the effectiveness of immersive and interactive forms of VR and evaluate other outcomes such as attitude, satisfaction, cost-effectiveness, and clinical practice or behavior change.

Keywords: health professions education; meta-analysis; randomized controlled trials; systematic review; virtual reality.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©Bhone Myint Kyaw, Nakul Saxena, Pawel Posadzki, Jitka Vseteckova, Charoula Konstantia Nikolaou, Pradeep Paul George, Ushashree Divakar, Italo Masiello, Andrzej A Kononowicz, Nabil Zary, Lorainne Tudor Car. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 22.01.2019.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study flow diagram. RCT: randomized controlled trial.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Risk of bias graph and summary.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest plot for the knowledge outcome (postintervention). df: degrees of freedom; IV: interval variable; random: random effects model; VR: virtual reality.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plot for the skills outcome (postintervention). df: degrees of freedom; IV: interval variable; random: random effects model; VR: virtual reality.

References

    1. World Health Organization. 2016. Mar 02, [2019-01-14]. High-Level Commission on Health Employment and Economic Growth
    1. Frenk J, Chen L, Bhutta ZA, Cohen J, Crisp N, Evans T, Fineberg H, Garcia P, Ke Y, Kelley P, Kistnasamy B, Meleis A, Naylor D, Pablos-Mendez A, Reddy S, Scrimshaw S, Sepulveda J, Serwadda D, Zurayk H. Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. Lancet. 2010 Dec 04;376(9756):1923–58. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61854-5.
    1. Transformative scale up of health professional education: an effort to increase the numbers of health professionals and to strengthen their impact on population health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011. [2019-01-14]. .
    1. Crisp N, Gawanas B, Sharp I, Task Force for Scaling Up EducationTraining for Health Workers Training the health workforce: scaling up, saving lives. Lancet. 2008 Feb 23;371(9613):689–91. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60309-8.
    1. Car J, Carlstedt-Duke J, Tudor Car L, Posadzki P, Whiting P, Zary N, Atun R, Majeed A, Campbell J. Digital education for health professions: methods for overarching evidence syntheses. J Med Internet Res. 2019:2018. doi: 10.2196/preprints.12913. (forthcoming)
    1. Saxena N, Kyaw B, Vseteckova J, Dev P, Paul P, Lim KT, Kononowicz AA, Masiello I, Tudor Car L, Nikolaou CK, Zary N, Car J. Virtual reality environments for health professional education. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Feb 09;(2):CD012090. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012090.
    1. Mantovani F, Castelnuovo G, Gaggioli A, Riva G. Virtual reality training for health-care professionals. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2003 Aug;6(4):389–95. doi: 10.1089/109493103322278772.
    1. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Petrusa ER, Scalese RJ. A critical review of simulation-based medical education research: 2003-2009. Med Educ. 2010 Jan;44(1):50–63. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03547.x.
    1. Rasmussen K, Belisario JM, Wark PA, Molina JA, Loong SL, Cotic Z, Papachristou N, Riboli-Sasco E, Tudor Car L, Musulanov EM, Kunz H, Zhang Y, George PP, Heng BH, Wheeler EL, Al Shorbaji N, Svab I, Atun R, Majeed A, Car J. Offline eLearning for undergraduates in health professions: a systematic review of the impact on knowledge, skills, attitudes and satisfaction. J Glob Health. 2014 Jun;4(1):010405. doi: 10.7189/jogh.04.010405.
    1. Andreatta PB, Maslowski E, Petty S, Shim W, Marsh M, Hall T, Stern S, Frankel J. Virtual reality triage training provides a viable solution for disaster-preparedness. Acad Emerg Med. 2010 Aug;17(8):870–6. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00728.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00728.x.
    1. Nicholson DT, Chalk C, Funnell WR, Daniel SJ. Can virtual reality improve anatomy education? A randomised controlled study of a computer-generated three-dimensional anatomical ear model. Med Educ. 2006 Nov;40(11):1081–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02611.x.
    1. Gurusamy KS, Aggarwal R, Palanivelu L, Davidson BR. Virtual reality training for surgical trainees in laparoscopic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21;(1):CD006575. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006575.pub2.
    1. Nagendran M, Gurusamy KS, Aggarwal R, Loizidou M, Davidson BR. Virtual reality training for surgical trainees in laparoscopic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Aug 27;(8):CD006575. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006575.pub3.
    1. Piromchai P, Avery A, Laopaiboon M, Kennedy G, O'Leary S. Virtual reality training for improving the skills needed for performing surgery of the ear, nose or throat. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Sep 09;(9):CD010198. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010198.pub2.
    1. Walsh CM, Sherlock ME, Ling SC, Carnahan H. Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jun 13;(6):CD008237. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008237.pub2.
    1. Fritz PZ, Gray T, Flanagan B. Review of mannequin-based high-fidelity simulation in emergency medicine. Emerg Med Australas. 2008 Feb;20(1):1–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-6723.2007.01022.x.
    1. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Lee Gordon D, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2005 Jan;27(1):10–28. doi: 10.1080/01421590500046924.
    1. Ziv A, Wolpe PR, Small SD, Glick S. Simulation-based medical education: an ethical imperative. Acad Med. 2003 Aug;78(8):783–8.
    1. Cochrane Library, The Cochrane Collaboration. 2011. [2019-01-15]. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011] .
    1. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000100. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100.
    1. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Juni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, Savovic J, Schulz KF, Weeks L, Sterne JAC. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011 Oct 18;343:d5928. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d5928.
    1. Cook DA, Hatala R, Brydges R, Zendejas B, Szostek JH, Wang AT, Erwin PJ, Hamstra SJ. Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Med Assoc. 2011 Sep 07;306(9):978–88. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.1234.
    1. RevMan 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2014. Jun 13, [2019-01-15]. .
    1. Bindoff I, Ling T, Bereznicki L, Westbury J, Chalmers L, Peterson G, Ollington R. A computer simulation of community pharmacy practice for educational use. Am J Pharm Educ. 2014 Nov 15;78(9):168. doi: 10.5688/ajpe789168.
    1. Claman FL. The impact of multiuser virtual environments on student engagement. Nurse Educ Pract. 2015 Jan;15(1):13–6. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2014.11.006.
    1. Drapkin ZA, Lindgren KA, Lopez MJ, Stabio ME. Development and assessment of a new 3D neuroanatomy teaching tool for MRI training. Anat Sci Educ. 2015;8(6):502–9. doi: 10.1002/ase.1509.
    1. Farra S, Miller E, Timm N, Schafer J. Improved training for disasters using 3-D virtual reality simulation. West J Nurs Res. 2013 May;35(5):655–71. doi: 10.1177/0193945912471735.
    1. Fritz D, Hu A, Wilson T, Ladak H, Haase P, Fung K. Long-term retention of a 3-dimensional educational computer model of the larynx: a follow-up study. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2011 Jun;137(6):598–603. doi: 10.1001/archoto.2011.76.
    1. Halfer D, Rosenheck M. Virtual education: is it effective for preparing nurses for a hospital move? J Nurs Adm. 2014 Oct;44(10):535–40. doi: 10.1097/NNA.0000000000000112.
    1. Hampton BS, Sung VW. Improving medical student knowledge of female pelvic floor dysfunction and anatomy: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Jun;202(6):601.e1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.08.038.
    1. Hampton BS, Sung VW. A randomized trial to estimate the effect of an interactive computer trainer on resident knowledge of female pelvic floor dysfunction and anatomy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2010 Jul;16(4):224–8. doi: 10.1097/SPV.0b013e3181ed3fb1.
    1. Hu A, Shewokis PA, Ting K, Fung K. Motivation in computer-assisted instruction. Laryngoscope. 2016 Aug;126 Suppl 6:S5–S13. doi: 10.1002/lary.26040.
    1. Hung P, Choi KS, Chiang VC. Using interactive computer simulation for teaching the proper use of personal protective equipment. Comput Inform Nurs. 2015 Feb;33(2):49–57. doi: 10.1097/CIN.0000000000000125.
    1. Kalet AL, Song HS, Sarpel U, Schwartz R, Brenner J, Ark TK, Plass J. Just enough, but not too much interactivity leads to better clinical skills performance after a computer assisted learning module. Med Teach. 2012 Aug;34(10):833–9. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.706727.
    1. Keedy AW, Durack JC, Sandhu P, Chen EM, O'Sullivan PS, Breiman RS. Comparison of traditional methods with 3D computer models in the instruction of hepatobiliary anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 2011 Mar;4(2):84–91. doi: 10.1002/ase.212.
    1. Khatib M, Hald N, Brenton H, Barakat MF, Sarker SK, Standfield N, Ziprin P, Kneebone R, Bello F. Validation of open inguinal hernia repair simulation model: a randomized controlled educational trial. Am J Surg. 2014 Aug;208(2):295–301. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.12.007.
    1. Kockro RA, Amaxopoulou C, Killeen T, Wagner W, Reisch R, Schwandt E, Gutenberg A, Giese A, Stofft E, Stadie AT. Stereoscopic neuroanatomy lectures using a three-dimensional virtual reality environment. Ann Anat. 2015 Sep;201:91–8. doi: 10.1016/j.aanat.2015.05.006.
    1. Kron FW, Fetters MD, Scerbo MW, White CB, Lypson ML, Padilla MA, Gliva-McConvey GA, Belfore LA, West T, Wallace AM, Guetterman TC, Schleicher LS, Kennedy RA, Mangrulkar RS, Cleary JF, Marsella SC, Becker DM. Using a computer simulation for teaching communication skills: a blinded multisite mixed methods randomized controlled trial. Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Apr;100(4):748–59. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.10.024.
    1. LeFlore JL, Anderson M, Zielke MA, Nelson KA, Thomas PE, Hardee G, John LD. Can a virtual patient trainer teach student nurses how to save lives--teaching nursing students about pediatric respiratory diseases. Simul Healthc. 2012 Feb;7(1):10–7. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e31823652de.
    1. Menzel N, Willson LH, Doolen J. Effectiveness of a poverty simulation in Second Life®: changing nursing student attitudes toward poor people. Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh. 2014 Mar 11;11(1):39–45. doi: 10.1515/ijnes-2013-0076.
    1. Metzler R, Stein D, Tetzlaff R, Bruckner T, Meinzer HP, Büchler MW, Kadmon M, Müller-Stich BP, Fischer L. Teaching on three-dimensional presentation does not improve the understanding of according CT images: a randomized controlled study. Teach Learn Med. 2012 Apr;24(2):140–8. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2012.664963.
    1. Niazi AU, Tait G, Carvalho JC, Chan VW. The use of an online three-dimensional model improves performance in ultrasound scanning of the spine: a randomized trial. Can J Anaesth. 2013 May;60(5):458–64. doi: 10.1007/s12630-013-9903-0.
    1. Patel V, Aggarwal R, Osinibi E, Taylor D, Arora S, Darzi A. Operating room introduction for the novice. Am J Surg. 2012 Feb;203(2):266–75. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.03.003.
    1. Prinz A, Bolz M, Findl O. Advantage of three dimensional animated teaching over traditional surgical videos for teaching ophthalmic surgery: a randomised study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005 Nov;89(11):1495–9. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2005.075077.
    1. Rae AO, Khatib M, Sarker SK, Bello F. The effect of a computer based open surgery simulation of an inguinal hernia repair on the results of cognitive task analysis performance of surgical trainees: an educational trial. Br J Surg. 2015;102(S1):40.
    1. Richardson A, Bracegirdle L, McLachlan SI, Chapman SR. Use of a three-dimensional virtual environment to teach drug-receptor interactions. Am J Pharm Educ. 2013 Feb 12;77(1):11. doi: 10.5688/ajpe77111.
    1. Sharma V, Chamos C, Valencia O, Meineri M, Fletcher SN. The impact of internet and simulation-based training on transoesophageal echocardiography learning in anaesthetic trainees: a prospective randomised study. Anaesthesia. 2013 Jun;68(6):621–7. doi: 10.1111/anae.12261. doi: 10.1111/anae.12261.
    1. Succar T, Zebington G, Billson F, Byth K, Barrie S, McCluskey P, Grigg J. The impact of the Virtual Ophthalmology Clinic on medical students' learning: a randomised controlled trial. Eye (Lond) 2013 Oct;27(10):1151–7. doi: 10.1038/eye.2013.143.
    1. Szumacher E, Harnett N, Warner S, Kelly V, Danjoux C, Barker R, Woo M, Mah K, Ackerman I, Dubrowski A, Rose S, Crook J. Effectiveness of educational intervention on the congruence of prostate and rectal contouring as compared with a gold standard in three-dimensional radiotherapy for prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Feb 01;76(2):379–85. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.02.008.
    1. Tan S, Hu A, Wilson T, Ladak H, Haase P, Fung K. Role of a computer-generated three-dimensional laryngeal model in anatomy teaching for advanced learners. J Laryngol Otol. 2012 Apr;126(4):395–401. doi: 10.1017/S0022215111002830.
    1. West N, Konge L, Cayé-Thomasen P, Sørensen MS, Andersen SA. Peak and ceiling effects in final-product analysis of mastoidectomy performance. J Laryngol Otol. 2015 Nov;129(11):1091–6. doi: 10.1017/S0022215115002364.
    1. Yeung JC, Fung K, Wilson TD. Prospective evaluation of a web-based three-dimensional cranial nerve simulation. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012 Dec;41(6):426–36. doi: 10.2310/7070.2012.00049.
    1. Zaveri PP, Davis AB, O'Connell KJ, Willner E, Aronson Schinasi DA, Ottolini M. Virtual reality for pediatric sedation: a randomized controlled trial using simulation. Cureus. 2016 Feb 9;8(2):e486. doi: 10.7759/cureus.486.
    1. Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Higgins JPT, Vist GE, Glasziou P, Guyatt GH. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. London, United Kingdom: Wiley; 2011. [2019-01-15]. Presenting results and 'summary of findings' tables .

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj