Learning procedural skills with a virtual reality simulator: An acceptability study

Abstract

Background: Virtual Reality (VR) simulation has recently been developed and has improved surgical training. Most VR simulators focus on learning technical skills and few on procedural skills. Studies that evaluated VR simulators focused on feasibility, reliability or easiness of use, but few of them used a specific acceptability measurement tool. Objectives: The aim of the study was to assess acceptability and usability of a new VR simulator for procedural skill training among scrub nurses, based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model. Participants: The simulator training system was tested with a convenience sample of 16 nonexpert users and 13 expert scrub nurses from the neurosurgery department of a French University Hospital. Methods: The scenario was designed to train scrub nurses in the preparation of the instrumentation table for a craniotomy in the operating room (OR). Results: Acceptability of the VR simulator was demonstrated with no significant difference between expert scrub nurses and non-experts. There was no effect of age, gender or expertise. Workload, immersion and simulator sickness were also rated equally by all participants. Most participants stressed its pedagogical interest, fun and realism, but some of them also regretted its lack of visual comfort. Conclusion: This VR simulator designed to teach surgical procedures can be widely used as a tool in initial or vocational training.

The Use of Virtual Reality Alone Does Not Promote Training Performance (but Sense of Presence Does)

“…It should be noted that the comparisons in this study were made with a fairly small sample size (but in line with previous similar studies, see An et al, 2018;Bracq et al, 2019;Liang et al, 2019). A larger sample size would increase the statistical power; for example, the inclusion of participants with a higher degree of SS may provide a better understanding on how discomfort during the VR simulation may affect task performance.…”

“…All the participants self-reported to be right-handed with no intake of psychotropic drugs, history of psychiatric/psychological illness, photosensitivity, or epilepsy seizures. The sample size was chosen to be in line with the ones reported by recently published papers that have investigated the effect of VR on training ( An et al, 2018 ; Bracq et al, 2019 ; Liang et al, 2019 ).…”

Are Modern Head-Mounted Displays Sexist? A Systematic Review on Gender Differences in HMD-Mediated Virtual Reality

“…An overview of these studies, their methodologies, and their findings are reported in Table 1 . Two of the included studies were published in 2016 (Allen et al, 2016 ; Robert et al, 2016 ), three in 2017 (Cárdenas-Delgado et al, 2017 ; Munafo et al, 2017 ; Wilson and Kinsela, 2017 ), eight in 2018 (An et al, 2018 ; Juan et al, 2018 ; Khashe et al, 2018 ; Melo et al, 2018 ; Mousas et al, 2018 ; Rangelova and Marsden, 2018 ; Roettl and Terlutter, 2018 ; Scheibler and Rodrigues, 2018 ), eight in 2019 (Al Zayer et al, 2019 ; Bracq et al, 2019 ; Chang et al, 2019 ; Clifton and Palmisano, 2019 ; Liang et al, 2019 ; Moroz et al, 2019 ; Narciso et al, 2019 ; Shafer et al, 2019 ), and one in 2020 (Curry et al, 2020 ).…”

“…Narciso et al ( 2019 ) reported that males and females may be sensitive to different features of the simulated environment and experience discomfort (nausea) accordingly (females more for two-dimensional [2D] environments, while males for three-dimensional [3D] environments). Seven of the analyzed studies did not report differences in SS and discomfort during VR simulation between male and female participants (experiment 1 in Munafo et al, 2017 ; Wilson and Kinsela, 2017 ; Melo et al, 2018 ; Al Zayer et al, 2019 ; Bracq et al, 2019 ; Clifton and Palmisano, 2019 ). Figure 2 displays the studies that reported increased discomfort between males and females, divided by the type of utilized HMD equipment and categories of VR content.…”

“…Of those, only Munafo et al, 2017 (study 2), reported a gender difference on the level of SS. The studies reporting a general low level of induced SS were Bracq et al ( 2019 ) and Shafer et al ( 2019 ), with the latter study reporting a gender unbalance on the level of SS.…”