OBJECTIVE: The present study compared the effectiveness of a virtual reality (VR) simulator for training phlebotomy with that of a more traditional approach using simulated limbs. BACKGROUND: Phlebotomy, or drawing blood, is one of the most common medical procedures; yet, there are no universal standards for training and assessing performance. The absence of any standards can lead to injuries and inaccurate test results if the procedure is improperly performed. METHOD: Twenty 3rd-year medical students were trained under one of the two methods and had their performance assessed with a 28-item checklist. RESULTS: The results showed that performance improvements were limited to those who trained with the simulated limbs, and a detailed comparison of the two systems revealed several functional and physical differences that may explain these findings. CONCLUSION: Participants trained with simulated limbs performed better than those trained with a VR simulator; however, the metrics recorded by the VR system may address some aspects of performance that could eventually prove beneficial. APPLICATION: The present study highlights the potential for medical simulators to improve patient safety by enabling trainees to practice procedures on devices instead of patients. Applications of this research include training, performance assessment, and design of simulator systems.
OBJECTIVE: The present study compared the effectiveness of a virtual reality (VR) simulator for training phlebotomy with that of a more traditional approach using simulated limbs. BACKGROUND: Phlebotomy, or drawing blood, is one of the most common medical procedures; yet, there are no universal standards for training and assessing performance. The absence of any standards can lead to injuries and inaccurate test results if the procedure is improperly performed. METHOD: Twenty 3rd-year medical students were trained under one of the two methods and had their performance assessed with a 28-item checklist. RESULTS: The results showed that performance improvements were limited to those who trained with the simulated limbs, and a detailed comparison of the two systems revealed several functional and physical differences that may explain these findings. CONCLUSION:Participants trained with simulated limbs performed better than those trained with a VR simulator; however, the metrics recorded by the VR system may address some aspects of performance that could eventually prove beneficial. APPLICATION: The present study highlights the potential for medical simulators to improve patient safety by enabling trainees to practice procedures on devices instead of patients. Applications of this research include training, performance assessment, and design of simulator systems.
Authors: Nowai L Keleekai; Catherine A Schuster; Connie L Murray; Mary Anne King; Brian R Stahl; Laura J Labrozzi; Susan Gallucci; Matthew W LeClair; Kevin R Glover Journal: Simul Healthc Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 1.929