Friederike Everad, Tobias Albrecht, Jan Kromeier, Stephan Heermann, Philip von Schnakenburg, Tanja Hildenbrand, Iva Speck, Andreas Knopf, Christian Offergeld
{"title":"A Virtual Reality Anatomy Model of the Temporal Bone in ORL Residency Training-Gain or Gadget?","authors":"Friederike Everad, Tobias Albrecht, Jan Kromeier, Stephan Heermann, Philip von Schnakenburg, Tanja Hildenbrand, Iva Speck, Andreas Knopf, Christian Offergeld","doi":"10.1177/23821205241281506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Virtual reality (VR) appears to be a promising educational tool for otorhinolaryngology (ORL) residency training, as it allows for safe and effective practice immediate feedback and potential improvements in patient outcomes. Despite these advantages, VR has not yet been incorporated into residency training in ORL, which may be due to limited availability or validation and skepticism toward incorporation of new training methods. This study investigates whether a VR model of the temporal bone improves learning success for ORL residents in comparison to standard plastic models and whether it depends on surgeon's experience. We also included a subjective evaluation of the learning experience with both models.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>ORL residents and specialists at 2 German university hospitals were tested on their knowledge of temporal bone anatomy after training with either VR or standard plastic models. In addition, we compared knowledge of the temporal bone anatomy before- and after-VR training. Lastly, a subjective survey on the benefits and limitations of VR was conducted to assess participants' views on this new technology.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>About 85% of the participants considered VR to be better than conventional models and agreed that VR was a useful tool for teaching complex anatomy. Objective evaluation showed significant improvement in knowledge after using VR (before/after comparison), especially in participants with a higher level of preexisting knowledge. Direct comparison to conventional plastic models showed no superiority of the VR model.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>VR models in ORL are not only appealing and motivating for residents, but also objectively improve their anatomical knowledge, especially in advanced residency. In addition, VR-in contrast to the plastic model-offers opportunities for further development and optimization.</p>","PeriodicalId":45121,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11483704/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23821205241281506","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Virtual reality (VR) appears to be a promising educational tool for otorhinolaryngology (ORL) residency training, as it allows for safe and effective practice immediate feedback and potential improvements in patient outcomes. Despite these advantages, VR has not yet been incorporated into residency training in ORL, which may be due to limited availability or validation and skepticism toward incorporation of new training methods. This study investigates whether a VR model of the temporal bone improves learning success for ORL residents in comparison to standard plastic models and whether it depends on surgeon's experience. We also included a subjective evaluation of the learning experience with both models.
Methods: ORL residents and specialists at 2 German university hospitals were tested on their knowledge of temporal bone anatomy after training with either VR or standard plastic models. In addition, we compared knowledge of the temporal bone anatomy before- and after-VR training. Lastly, a subjective survey on the benefits and limitations of VR was conducted to assess participants' views on this new technology.
Results: About 85% of the participants considered VR to be better than conventional models and agreed that VR was a useful tool for teaching complex anatomy. Objective evaluation showed significant improvement in knowledge after using VR (before/after comparison), especially in participants with a higher level of preexisting knowledge. Direct comparison to conventional plastic models showed no superiority of the VR model.
Conclusion: VR models in ORL are not only appealing and motivating for residents, but also objectively improve their anatomical knowledge, especially in advanced residency. In addition, VR-in contrast to the plastic model-offers opportunities for further development and optimization.