Comparison between virtual reality and traditional lecture methods in educating respiratory therapy on pediatric airway diseases.

Abstract

Background: Pediatric airway diseases are associated with complex challenges because of smaller and more dynamic airway structures in children. These conditions, should be immediately and precisely recognized to prevent life-threatening obstructions and long-term respiratory complications. Recently, virtual reality (VR) has emerged as an innovative approach to clinical medical education. To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of VR-based education and traditional lectures in enhancing knowledge retention, clinical reasoning, and motivation among senior respiratory therapy students.

Methods: This study was conducted between November 2020 and September 2022, involving 54 students from a School of Respiratory Therapy, with 43 completing a pretest and undergoing random assignment into either a VR or a traditional education (non-VR) group. Samsung Gear VR Oculus headsets were used by the VR group for instructions on conditions such as laryngeal malacia, subglottic stenosis, and tracheomalacia. Theoretical exams, objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE), and instructional material motivation survey (IMMS) were used to evaluate participants' knowledge retention, clinical reasoning, and application capabilities, followed by a statistical analysis comparing both study groups.

Results: No significant differences in pretest scores were observed between the two groups. However, the VR group outperformed the non-VR group in OSCE scores significantly (15 ± 3 vs 10 ± 3, p = 0.003) and demonstrated greater learning motivation and satisfaction based on IMMS scores. No notable difference in immediate posteducation theoretical examination scores was observed between the groups.

Conclusion: VR can effectively serve as a supplemental educational tool in clinical training programs for pediatric airway disease. To optimize its implementation in medical educational settings, further research with larger cohorts and longer follow-up periods is needed.