Title: Virtual Reality and the Transformation of Medical Education
Author Name: Holly Šedys
Selected Case (Published Article): Pottle J. Virtual reality and the transformation of medical education. Future Healthc J. 2019.
1. Introduction
Medical education is very time consuming and costly. Students have to learn a large quantity of medical information as well as developing problem solving, communication, and empathy skills (Reiser, R.A. & Dempsey, J.V., 2017). One of the most common ways that medical students gain clinical training in medical school is by participating in simulation training (Pottle, 2019). The use of simulation based medical training can date back to the 17th century; however, it has become more widely used in the past 40 years (McGaghie, et al., 2010). Positives of using simulation based technologies are that they can be more deliberately integrated into the curriculum, allows the students to practice clinical training without using live patients, and allows for more professional feedback and continued practice/revision (McGaghie, et al., 2010). While providing simulation based trainings can ultimately reduce medical costs because it increases patient safety, funding simulation training centers can be pricey (McIntosh, et al., 2006). This is where the use of virtual reality in simulation based medical training comes in. Virtual reality simulation trainings are considered a more cost-effective option in medical training. A research study conducted on 84 nursing students showed that the cost-utility ratio was $1.08 when doing a virtual simulation activity versus $3.62 when doing a mannequin simulation activity (Haerling, 2018).
Virtual reality creates a simulated environment through the use of technology. “Virtual reality consists of output tools (vision, hearing, tactile and power transmitter), input devices (mouse, chaser, gloves, etc.), a virtual environment’s graphical manufacturing system as well as an information software.” (Samadbeik, et al., 2018) In recent years, there continues to be studies that show medical students benefit more from VR based trainings vs. patient centered training (Walsh, et al., 2012).
2. Overview of the Case
This article reviews how virtual reality is becoming a popular method in simulation training in the medical field. Experiential learning opportunities are paramount in medical education, and they can sometimes be difficulty to maintain because of cost, changing information/best practices, and the complexity of information and skills. This move from rote learning to more clinically relevant teaching can be supported by the use of virtual reality. While engaging in virtual reality software, the learner uses a head mounted display that allows for them to be immersed in the experience and engage with the environment is a life like way. This article highlights how VR is being used in clinical simulation training as well as the drawbacks and other implications of the technology.
3. Solutions Implemented
The article highlights how using VR can improve the simplicity of access to clinical training. It is easy to use and most learners have access because the basic forms of VR simulations are a computer and headset. These types of VR simulations allow the learner to participate without faculty present and allows for greater access and flexibility of learners (Pottle, 2019). Because of this flexibility, simulation training can be implemented more easily into the curriculum and can used regularly as a learning activity (McGaghie, et al., 2010). Another key feature of using VR simulations is that they are easily repeatable. This allows medical students to make mistakes without the fear of patient safety and have the time to problem solve simulations that they usually wouldn’t in a large simulation center or on a live patient (McGaghie, et al., 2010). While this article and others note that VR simulations typically cost less to set-up up maintain, this case also notes that there is cost of resources like time and space when using VR (Pottle, 2019). Faculty don’t necessarily need to supervise the use of VR simulations. The space needed for these learning activities is small and allows for other simulation activities to occur in the same space. Another benefit of VR systems is that they produce easily accessible performance data and the trainings can be tailored for the specific learning activity. Finally, a major solution of using VR simulation is that is can distributed globally because of its cost effectiveness and ease of accessibility (Pottle, 2019).
4. Outcomes
Studies show that medical students show a higher understanding of knowledge when participating in immersive training experiences, and surgical training has been one of the major areas to adopt immersive VR experiences. Using VR in surgical training has proven to decrease mistakes, improve the operation time, and produce a more positive surgical outcome (Gutiérrez, et al., 2007).
The use of virtual reality in medical education isn’t a one size fits all approach. There are some procedures where VR simulations either aren’t necessary or could hinder learning. For example, it isn’t useful in teaching abdominal palpitations or cannulation (Pottle, 2019). While a large portion of medical training includes teaching communication and empathy, VR, and its AI components, aren’t yet complex enough to teach the skills required for empathetic communication like delivering bad news to a patient. It is also important to note that the use of VR simulation should not replace educators. It is simply a learning tool to enhance the educational outcome of medical training and support learning.
5. Implications
In addition to using VR in medical training, VR can be implemented in the recruitment process for the healthcare industry (Zertuche, et al., 2020). This makes recruiting easier and more accessible to people who would need to travel. Another implication of VR in the medical industry is using it on patients, especially for neurological exams. This technology would also allow for patients to monitor certain conditions at home (Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research, 2022). Because standardization of scoring is possible with VR, this technology is also started to be implemented in clinical exams. One of the downsides to this article is that it was a review of other studies and just discussed the positive and negatives of using VR simulations in medical training. It primarily focused on using VR in simulation trainings and didn’t cover in depth the many other uses of VR in medical education.
6. References
1. Gutiérrez, F., Pierce, J., Vergara, V. M., Coulter, R., Saland, L., Caudell, T. P., Goldsmith, T. E., & Alverson, D. C. (2007). The effect of degree of immersion upon learning performance in virtual reality simulations for medical education. Studies in health technology and informatics, 125, 155–160.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17377256/
2. Haerling, Katie A. PhD. Cost-Utility Analysis of Virtual and Mannequin-Based Simulation. Simulation in Healthcare: The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare: February 2018 – Volume 13 – Issue 1 – p 33-40. https://journals.lww.com/simulationinhealthcare/FullText/2018/02000/Cost_Utility_Analysis_of_Virtual_and.6.aspx
3. Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research. (2022, February 25). Neurology and neurosurgery. Mayo Clinic. Retrieved December 4, 2022, from https://www.mayoclinic.org/medical-professionals/neurology-neurosurgery/news/virtual-reality-for-enhanced-neurological-exams/mac-20528542
6. Pottle J. (2019). Virtual reality and the transformation of medical education. Future healthcare journal, 6(3), 181–185. https://doi.org/10.7861/fhj.2019-0036
7. Reiser, R.A. & Dempsey, J.V. (Eds.) (2017), Ch. 19. Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
8. Samadbeik, M., Yaaghobi, D., Bastani, P., Abhari, S., Rezaee, R., & Garavand, A. (2018). The Applications of Virtual Reality Technology in Medical Groups Teaching. Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism, 6(3), 123–129. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6039818/
9. Walsh, C. M., Sherlock, M. E., Ling, S. C., & Carnahan, H. (2012). Virtual reality simulation training for health professions trainees in gastrointestinal endoscopy. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, (6), CD008237. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008237.pub2
10. Zertuche, J. P., Connors, J., Scheinman, A., Kothari, N., & Wong, K. (2020). Using virtual reality as a replacement for hospital tours during residency interviews. Medical education online, 25(1), 1777066. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2020.1777066