BACKGROUND
Virtual reality (VR) is increasingly utilized in healthcare training and assessment, offering immersive experiences through head-mounted displays. Compared to traditional Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs), which are costly and may be burdensome, VR could provide an attractive alternative by recreating scenarios and presenting pathological findings through virtual patients (VPs). VR also enables scalability, standardization, and potential automation of checklist completion, alleviating the cognitive load on examiners.
OBJECTIVE
The study aims to explore the use of a VR OSCE station and compare it to a traditional on-campus OSCE station in undergraduate medical education. It investigates how students perceive workload, fairness, and realism, and compares student performance between the two types of stations. Additionally, the study examines the item and scale analysis of checklist items, the VR-related side effects experienced by students, and their evaluation of the VR station's usability and acceptance. Finally, it identifies the technical challenges involved in conducting and evaluating a VR OSCE station.
METHODS
This quasi-experimental comparison study is conducted at the University of Bern, comparing a traditional OSCE case with a corresponding VR OSCE case. To assess workload, fairness, realism, VR-related side effects, technology acceptance, and usability, we use validated questionnaires. The official exam checklist is used to compare student performance in both the VR and traditional cases. Additionally, technical challenges encountered during the VR OSCE are documented.
RESULTS
Study recruitment and data collection on the traditional OSCE began in April 2024. The VR OSCE will be conducted in the summer of 2024.
CONCLUSIONS
This study will compare a traditional OSCE with a VR OSCE to assess feasibility, workload, performance, realism, and fairness, ultimately providing insights for the potential integration of VR OSCE into high stakes assessments.