医学专业人员沉浸式虚拟现实与传统辐射安全教学培训的比较效果:一项交叉研究。

IF 2 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Wanjiku Mwangi, Yuki Tanaka
{"title":"医学专业人员沉浸式虚拟现实与传统辐射安全教学培训的比较效果:一项交叉研究。","authors":"Wanjiku Mwangi, Yuki Tanaka","doi":"10.1002/jmrs.867","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Radiation safety is critical in medical settings where ionising radiation is routinely used. Traditional didactic training methods often fail to provide the practical skills needed for effective safety protocol implementation. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR)-based radiation safety training with traditional didactic methods in reducing radiation exposure among medical professionals. Secondary objectives included assessing participant satisfaction, engagement and confidence in applying radiation safety practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 2-year randomised crossover trial was conducted with 39 medical professionals from cardiac catheterization laboratories and orthopaedic theatres. Group A received VR training in Year 1 and didactic training in Year 2, while Group B received the reverse. Radiation exposure was measured using Landauer Vision dosimeters. Participant feedback on satisfaction, engagement and confidence was collected through surveys. Data were analysed using paired t-tests, generalised estimating equations and non-parametric tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>VR training significantly reduced radiation exposure compared to didactic training, with larger effect sizes per hour of training. Group A showed significant reductions during Year 1 when they received VR training (Year 2: didactic training), while Group B exhibited similar reductions during Year 2 when they underwent VR training (Year 1: didactic training). Group A, which received VR training in Year 1 followed by didactic training in Year 2, showed significant reductions in radiation exposure during Year 1. Group B, which received didactic training in Year 1 followed by VR training in Year 2, exhibited similar reductions during Year 2. Participant satisfaction and engagement were higher with VR training (p < 0.001), and confidence in applying safety practices increased significantly following VR training (p < 0.001). Group A reported these improvements after VR training in Year 1, while Group B experienced similar benefits after VR training in Year 2. Group A reported these improvements after VR training in Year 1, while Group B experienced similar benefits after VR training in Year 2.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The RadSafe VR Program is more effective than traditional didactic training in reducing radiation exposure among medical professionals. VR training enhances radiation safety practices, improves participant satisfaction and increases confidence, offering a scalable and cost-effective training solution.</p>","PeriodicalId":16382,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Effectiveness of Immersive Virtual Reality and Traditional Didactic Training on Radiation Safety in Medical Professionals: A Crossover Study.\",\"authors\":\"Wanjiku Mwangi, Yuki Tanaka\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jmrs.867\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Radiation safety is critical in medical settings where ionising radiation is routinely used. Traditional didactic training methods often fail to provide the practical skills needed for effective safety protocol implementation. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR)-based radiation safety training with traditional didactic methods in reducing radiation exposure among medical professionals. Secondary objectives included assessing participant satisfaction, engagement and confidence in applying radiation safety practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 2-year randomised crossover trial was conducted with 39 medical professionals from cardiac catheterization laboratories and orthopaedic theatres. Group A received VR training in Year 1 and didactic training in Year 2, while Group B received the reverse. Radiation exposure was measured using Landauer Vision dosimeters. Participant feedback on satisfaction, engagement and confidence was collected through surveys. Data were analysed using paired t-tests, generalised estimating equations and non-parametric tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>VR training significantly reduced radiation exposure compared to didactic training, with larger effect sizes per hour of training. Group A showed significant reductions during Year 1 when they received VR training (Year 2: didactic training), while Group B exhibited similar reductions during Year 2 when they underwent VR training (Year 1: didactic training). Group A, which received VR training in Year 1 followed by didactic training in Year 2, showed significant reductions in radiation exposure during Year 1. Group B, which received didactic training in Year 1 followed by VR training in Year 2, exhibited similar reductions during Year 2. Participant satisfaction and engagement were higher with VR training (p < 0.001), and confidence in applying safety practices increased significantly following VR training (p < 0.001). Group A reported these improvements after VR training in Year 1, while Group B experienced similar benefits after VR training in Year 2. Group A reported these improvements after VR training in Year 1, while Group B experienced similar benefits after VR training in Year 2.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The RadSafe VR Program is more effective than traditional didactic training in reducing radiation exposure among medical professionals. VR training enhances radiation safety practices, improves participant satisfaction and increases confidence, offering a scalable and cost-effective training solution.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.867\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.867","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在常规使用电离辐射的医疗环境中,辐射安全至关重要。传统的教学培训方法往往不能提供有效实施安全协议所需的实践技能。本研究旨在比较基于虚拟现实(VR)的辐射安全培训与传统教学方法在减少医疗专业人员辐射暴露方面的有效性。次要目标包括评估参与者对应用辐射安全措施的满意度、参与度和信心。方法:对来自心导管实验室和骨科手术室的39名医学专业人员进行为期2年的随机交叉试验。A组在第一年接受虚拟现实培训,在第二年接受教学培训,而B组则相反。使用兰道尔视觉剂量计测量辐射暴露。通过调查收集了参与者对满意度、参与度和信心的反馈。使用配对t检验、广义估计方程和非参数检验对数据进行分析。结果:与说教式训练相比,VR训练显著减少了辐射暴露,每小时训练的效果更大。A组在第1年接受VR培训(第2年:说教式培训)时出现了显著的减少,而B组在第2年接受VR培训(第1年:说教式培训)时也出现了类似的减少。A组在第一年接受VR培训,然后在第二年接受教学性培训,在第一年的辐射暴露显著减少。B组在第一年接受教学培训,然后在第二年接受VR培训,在第二年也出现了类似的减少。结论:RadSafe VR项目在减少医学专业人员的辐射暴露方面比传统的教学培训更有效。虚拟现实培训增强了辐射安全实践,提高了参与者的满意度,增加了信心,提供了可扩展且具有成本效益的培训解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Effectiveness of Immersive Virtual Reality and Traditional Didactic Training on Radiation Safety in Medical Professionals: A Crossover Study.

Introduction: Radiation safety is critical in medical settings where ionising radiation is routinely used. Traditional didactic training methods often fail to provide the practical skills needed for effective safety protocol implementation. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR)-based radiation safety training with traditional didactic methods in reducing radiation exposure among medical professionals. Secondary objectives included assessing participant satisfaction, engagement and confidence in applying radiation safety practices.

Methods: A 2-year randomised crossover trial was conducted with 39 medical professionals from cardiac catheterization laboratories and orthopaedic theatres. Group A received VR training in Year 1 and didactic training in Year 2, while Group B received the reverse. Radiation exposure was measured using Landauer Vision dosimeters. Participant feedback on satisfaction, engagement and confidence was collected through surveys. Data were analysed using paired t-tests, generalised estimating equations and non-parametric tests.

Results: VR training significantly reduced radiation exposure compared to didactic training, with larger effect sizes per hour of training. Group A showed significant reductions during Year 1 when they received VR training (Year 2: didactic training), while Group B exhibited similar reductions during Year 2 when they underwent VR training (Year 1: didactic training). Group A, which received VR training in Year 1 followed by didactic training in Year 2, showed significant reductions in radiation exposure during Year 1. Group B, which received didactic training in Year 1 followed by VR training in Year 2, exhibited similar reductions during Year 2. Participant satisfaction and engagement were higher with VR training (p < 0.001), and confidence in applying safety practices increased significantly following VR training (p < 0.001). Group A reported these improvements after VR training in Year 1, while Group B experienced similar benefits after VR training in Year 2. Group A reported these improvements after VR training in Year 1, while Group B experienced similar benefits after VR training in Year 2.

Conclusion: The RadSafe VR Program is more effective than traditional didactic training in reducing radiation exposure among medical professionals. VR training enhances radiation safety practices, improves participant satisfaction and increases confidence, offering a scalable and cost-effective training solution.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences
Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
4.80%
发文量
69
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences (JMRS) is an international and multidisciplinary peer-reviewed journal that accepts manuscripts related to medical imaging / diagnostic radiography, radiation therapy, nuclear medicine, medical ultrasound / sonography, and the complementary disciplines of medical physics, radiology, radiation oncology, nursing, psychology and sociology. Manuscripts may take the form of: original articles, review articles, commentary articles, technical evaluations, case series and case studies. JMRS promotes excellence in international medical radiation science by the publication of contemporary and advanced research that encourages the adoption of the best clinical, scientific and educational practices in international communities. JMRS is the official professional journal of the Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy (ASMIRT) and the New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology (NZIMRT).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信