The feasibility and usability of mixed reality teaching in a hospital setting based on self-reported perceptions of medical students

Abstract

Abstract Background Clinical teaching during encounters with real patients lies at the heart of medical education. Mixed reality (MR) using a Microsoft HoloLens 2 (HL2) offers the potential to address several challenges: including enabling remote learning; decreasing infection control risks; facilitating greater access to medical specialties; and enhancing learning by vertical integration of basic principles to clinical application. We aimed to assess the feasibility and usability of MR using the HL2 for teaching in a busy, tertiary referral university hospital. Methods This prospective observational study examined the use of the HL2 to facilitate a live two-way broadcast of a clinician-patient encounter, to remotely situated third and fourth year medical students. System Usability Scale (SUS) Scores were elicited from participating medical students, clinician, and technician. Feedback was also elicited from participating patients. A modified Evaluation of Technology-Enhanced Learning Materials: Learner Perceptions Questionnaire (mETELM) was completed by medical students and patients. Results This was a mixed methods prospective, observational study, undertaken in the Day of Surgery Assessment Unit. Forty-seven medical students participated. The mean SUS score for medical students was 71.4 (SD 15.4), clinician (SUS = 75) and technician (SUS = 70) indicating good usability. The mETELM Questionnaire using a 7-point Likert Scale demonstrated MR was perceived to be more beneficial than a PowerPoint presentation (Median = 7, Range 6–7). Opinion amongst the student cohort was divided as to whether the MR tutorial was as beneficial for learning as a live patient encounter would have been (Median = 5, Range 3–6). Students were positive about the prospect of incorporating of MR in future tutorials (Median = 7, Range 5–7). The patients’ mETELM results indicate the HL2 did not affect communication with the clinician (Median = 7, Range 7–7). The MR tutorial was preferred to a format based on small group teaching at the bedside (Median = 6, Range 4–7). Conclusions Our study findings indicate that MR teaching using the HL2 demonstrates good usability characteristics for providing education to medical students at least in a clinical setting and under conditions similar to those of our study. Also, it is feasible to deliver to remotely located students, although certain practical constraints apply including Wi-Fi and audio quality.