Amandeep S Rai1, Amrit S Rai1, Emmanouil Mavrikakis1, Wai Ching Lam2. 1. Department of Ophthalmology & Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. 2. Department of Ophthalmology & Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. Electronic address: waiching.lam@utoronto.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the traditional teaching approach of binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy (BIO) to the EyeSI augmented reality (AR) BIO simulator. DESIGN: Prospective randomized control trial. PARTICIPANTS: 28 post-graduate year one (PGY1) ophthalmology residents. METHODS:Residents were recruited at the 2012 Toronto Ophthalmology Residents Introductory Course (TORIC). 15 were randomized to conventional teaching (Group 1), and 13 to augmented reality simulator training (Group 2). 3 vitreoretinal fellows were enrolled to serve as experts. Evaluations were completed on the simulator, with 3 tasks, and outcome measures were total raw score, total time elapsed, and performance. RESULTS: Following conventional training, Group 1 residents were outperformed by vitreoretinal fellows with respect to all 3 outcome measures. Following AR training, Group 2 residents demonstrated superior total scores and performance compared to Group 1 residents. Once the Group 1 residents also completed the AR BIO training, there was a significant improvement compared to their baseline scores, and were now on par with Group 2 residents. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides construct validity for the EyeSI AR BIO simulator and demonstrates that it may be superior to conventional BIO teaching for novice ophthalmology residents.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the traditional teaching approach of binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy (BIO) to the EyeSI augmented reality (AR) BIO simulator. DESIGN: Prospective randomized control trial. PARTICIPANTS: 28 post-graduate year one (PGY1) ophthalmology residents. METHODS: Residents were recruited at the 2012 Toronto Ophthalmology Residents Introductory Course (TORIC). 15 were randomized to conventional teaching (Group 1), and 13 to augmented reality simulator training (Group 2). 3 vitreoretinal fellows were enrolled to serve as experts. Evaluations were completed on the simulator, with 3 tasks, and outcome measures were total raw score, total time elapsed, and performance. RESULTS: Following conventional training, Group 1 residents were outperformed by vitreoretinal fellows with respect to all 3 outcome measures. Following AR training, Group 2 residents demonstrated superior total scores and performance compared to Group 1 residents. Once the Group 1 residents also completed the AR BIO training, there was a significant improvement compared to their baseline scores, and were now on par with Group 2 residents. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides construct validity for the EyeSI AR BIO simulator and demonstrates that it may be superior to conventional BIO teaching for novice ophthalmology residents.
Authors: Mina Iskander; Titilola Ogunsola; Rithambara Ramachandran; Richard McGowan; Lama A Al-Aswad Journal: Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila) Date: 2021 May-Jun 01