Innovative approaches to pericardiocentesis training: a comparative study of 3D-printed and virtual reality simulation models.

Abstract

Background: Training in invasive procedures like pericardiocentesis is a critical component of medical education but poses significant challenges due to its complexity and infrequent clinical application. Pericardiocentesis is an invasive procedure used to remove excess pericardial fluid from the pericardial sac, typically performed to relieve cardiac tamponade. It requires precise anatomical knowledge, ultrasound guidance, and dexterous needle placement to minimize complications. Simulation-based training, particularly with innovative technologies such as 3D printing and virtual reality (VR), offers accessible and cost-effective solutions. This study compared the effectiveness of 3D-printed mannequins and VR simulations in pericardiocentesis training, focusing on learning outcomes, stress responses, and cognitive load.

Methods: Thirty-five final-year medical students participated in this quasi-experimental study, receiving training with both models in separate sessions under the supervision of two experienced instructors. Learning outcomes were evaluated using the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE), while stress responses were assessed via heart rate variability (HRV), a measure of fluctuations in heart rate that reflect stress levels. Perceived cognitive load was measured with the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX). Wilcoxon signed-rank and Friedman tests were used for statistical analysis.

Results: The 3D-printed mannequin outperformed VR in tasks requiring fine motor skills, such as material handling and drainage placement (Z = - 2.56, p < 0.05; Z = - 2.34, p < 0.05). VR training, however, was associated with lower mental demand and effort (Z = - 2.147, p < 0.05; Z = - 2.356, p < 0.05). Biometric analysis indicated higher stress levels during mannequin-based training (SD1/SD2, chi-square = 14.157, p < 0.01), reflecting its closer replication of real-life clinical conditions.

Conclusions: Both 3D-printed mannequins and VR simulations serve as effective tools for pericardiocentesis training, each offering unique advantages. The 3D-printed mannequin supports tactile skill acquisition, while VR enhances cognitive engagement in a low-stress environment. A hybrid approach-beginning with VR and progressing to 3D-printed models-maximizes training outcomes, particularly in resource-limited settings, where affordable simulation tools can improve access to medical education.