Jaisa Olasky1, Ganesh Sankaranarayanan2, Neal E Seymour3, J Harvey Magee4, Andinet Enquobahrie5, Ming C Lin6, Rajesh Aggarwal7, L Michael Brunt8, Steven D Schwaitzberg9, Caroline G L Cao10, Suvranu De2, Daniel B Jones11. 1. Mount Auburn Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, MA, USA jsolasky@gmail.com. 2. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, USA. 3. Tufts University School of Medicine, Springfield, MA, USA. 4. University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA. 5. Kitware, Carrboro, NC, USA. 6. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 7. University of Pennsylvania Medical School, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 8. Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA. 9. Cambridge Health Alliance, Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, MA, USA. 10. Wright State University, Dayton, OH, USA. 11. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To conduct a review of the state of virtual reality (VR) simulation technology, to identify areas of surgical education that have the greatest potential to benefit from it, and to identify challenges to implementation. BACKGROUND DATA: Simulation is an increasingly important part of surgical training. VR is a developing platform for using simulation to teach technical skills, behavioral skills, and entire procedures to trainees and practicing surgeons worldwide. Questions exist regarding the science behind the technology and most effective usage of VR simulation. A symposium was held to address these issues. METHODS: Engineers, educators, and surgeons held a conference in November 2013 both to review the background science behind simulation technology and to create guidelines for its use in teaching and credentialing trainees and surgeons in practice. RESULTS: Several technologic challenges were identified that must be overcome in order for VR simulation to be useful in surgery. Specific areas of student, resident, and practicing surgeon training and testing that would likely benefit from VR were identified: technical skills, team training and decision-making skills, and patient safety, such as in use of electrosurgical equipment. CONCLUSIONS: VR simulation has the potential to become an essential piece of surgical education curriculum but depends heavily on the establishment of an agreed upon set of goals. Researchers and clinicians must collaborate to allocate funding toward projects that help achieve these goals. The recommendations outlined here should guide further study and implementation of VR simulation.
OBJECTIVES: To conduct a review of the state of virtual reality (VR) simulation technology, to identify areas of surgical education that have the greatest potential to benefit from it, and to identify challenges to implementation. BACKGROUND DATA: Simulation is an increasingly important part of surgical training. VR is a developing platform for using simulation to teach technical skills, behavioral skills, and entire procedures to trainees and practicing surgeons worldwide. Questions exist regarding the science behind the technology and most effective usage of VR simulation. A symposium was held to address these issues. METHODS: Engineers, educators, and surgeons held a conference in November 2013 both to review the background science behind simulation technology and to create guidelines for its use in teaching and credentialing trainees and surgeons in practice. RESULTS: Several technologic challenges were identified that must be overcome in order for VR simulation to be useful in surgery. Specific areas of student, resident, and practicing surgeon training and testing that would likely benefit from VR were identified: technical skills, team training and decision-making skills, and patient safety, such as in use of electrosurgical equipment. CONCLUSIONS: VR simulation has the potential to become an essential piece of surgical education curriculum but depends heavily on the establishment of an agreed upon set of goals. Researchers and clinicians must collaborate to allocate funding toward projects that help achieve these goals. The recommendations outlined here should guide further study and implementation of VR simulation.
Authors: Neal E Seymour; Anthony G Gallagher; Sanziana A Roman; Michael K O'Brien; Vipin K Bansal; Dana K Andersen; Richard M Satava Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Pamela B Andreatta; Derek T Woodrum; John D Birkmeyer; Rajani K Yellamanchilli; Gerard M Doherty; Paul G Gauger; Rebecca M Minter Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Charity C Glass; Robert D Acton; Patrice G Blair; Andre R Campbell; Ellen S Deutsch; Daniel B Jones; Kathleen R Liscum; Ajit K Sachdeva; Daniel J Scott; Stephen C Yang Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2013-10-29 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Tobias Huber; Tom Wunderling; Markus Paschold; Hauke Lang; Werner Kneist; Christian Hansen Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2017-11-18 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Rajarshi Roy; Eric Warren; Yaoyao Xu; Caleb Yow; Rama S Madhurapantula; Joseph P R O Orgel; Kevin Lister Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2020-09-05 Impact factor: 5.923