The influence of virtual reality simulation on surgical residents' heart rate during an assessment of arthroscopic technical skills: A prospective, paired observational study.

Hypothesis: To demonstrate that a virtual reality (VR) simulation training program reduces heart rate variability during an assessment of surgical trainees' technical skills in arthroscopy.

Study design: Prospective observational matched study.

Materials & methods: Thirty-six orthopaedic surgery residents, new to arthroscopy, received standard training in arthroscopic knee surgery, supplemented by additional monthly training for 6months on a VR simulator for 16 of them. At inclusion, the 2 groups (VR and NON-VR) answered a questionnaire and performed a meniscectomy on a VR simulator. After 6months of training, two independent trainers blinded to the inclusion arms evaluated the technical skills of the two groups during meniscectomies on a model and on an anatomical subject. Heart rate variability (HRV) was measured using a wireless heart rate monitor during baseline, VR training, and assessment.

Results: After removing incomplete data, the analysis focused on 10 VR residents matched at inclusion with 10 NON-VR residents. The VR group had a significantly lower heart rate at the final assessment (p=0.02) and lower overall HRV (p=0.05). The low/high frequency ratio (LF/HF) was not significantly different between the groups (1.84 vs 2.05, p=0.66) but the before-after training comparison showed a greater decrease in this ratio in the VR group compared to the NON-VR group -0.76 (-41%) vs -0.08 (-4%).

Conclusion: This study demonstrates a significant difference in heart rate variability between trained residents versus untrained residents during the final assessment of their technical skills at 6months. It appears that improving stress management should be an integral part of training programs in arthroscopic surgery.

Clinical interest: VR simulators in arthroscopy could improve non-technical skills such as heart rate variability, from the perspective of accountability.

Level of evidence: III.