Comparing virtual reality and simulation to teach the assessment and management of acute surgical scenarios: A pilot study

Abstract

AbstractBackground and AimsTraditional apprenticeship‐based surgical training presents with challenges, especially in acute scenarios. Simulation provides the current standard of facilitating surgical training in a low‐risk environment but is restricted by limited accessibility and high costs. Virtual reality (VR) offers immersive three‐dimensional computer‐generated training scenarios and can connect users from various locations. We aimed to compare the performance of junior doctors to manage an acute surgical scenario using VR and mannequin‐based simulation. We hypothesised that VR would be as effective as mannequin‐based simulation in performance outcomes.MethodsThis multicentre, randomised controlled pilot study was conducted with eighteen junior doctor volunteers (Foundation and Core Trainee Year 1). Ten were randomly allocated to VR and eight to mannequin‐based simulation. Participants completed questionnaires and a 15‐min pneumothorax scenario. Quantitative metrics included overall score, time‐to‐critical decisions, and academic buoyancy scores (ABS). Qualitative metrics included participants' likes and dislikes of their allocated simulation modality.ResultsVR participants scored significantly higher than mannequin‐based simulation participants in overall scores (74.30% (SD ± 5.08%) vs. 59.75% (SD ± 10.14) (p = 0.04)), and technical skills aspects (77.20% (SD ± 8.01%) vs. 65.00% (SD ± 8.21%) (p = 0.01)). Mannequin‐based simulation participants initiated critical decisions faster and demonstrated a trend towards a faster mean time‐to‐completion (p = 0.06). ABS scores increased for both study groups, though was only significant for VR participants (p ≤ 0.01). VR participants liked how VR fostered independent learning but disliked the formulaic content and impaired communication‐learning compared to mannequin‐based simulation.ConclusionBoth VR and mannequin‐based simulation training are effective in training junior doctors in acute surgical scenarios but present different educational benefits. Future research should recruit a larger sample size for a full comparative randomised controlled trial.