Malte Issleib1, Alina Kromer2, Hans O Pinnschmidt3, Christoph Süss-Havemann2, Jens C Kubitz2,4. 1. Department of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martini-Str. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. missleib@uke.de. 2. Department of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martini-Str. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. 3. Department of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martini-Str. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. 4. Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Paracelsus Medical University Nuremberg, Breslauer Straße 201, 90471, Nuremberg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Virtual reality is an innovative technology for medical education associated with high empirical realism. Therefore, this study compares a conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training with a Virtual Reality (VR) training aiming to demonstrate: (a) non-inferiority of the VR intervention in respect of no flow time and (b) superiority in respect of subjective learning gain. METHODS: In this controlled randomized study first year, undergraduate students were allocated in the intervention group and the control group. Fifty-six participants were randomized to the intervention group and 104 participants to the control group. The intervention group received an individual 35-min VR Basic Life Support (BLS) course and a basic skill training. The control group took part in a "classic" BLS-course with a seminar and a basic skill training. The groups were compared in respect of no flow time in a final 3-min BLS examination (primary outcome) and their learning gain (secondary outcome) assessed with a comparative self-assessment (CSA) using a questionnaire at the beginning and the end of the course. Data analysis was performed with a general linear fixed effects model. RESULTS: The no flow time was significantly shorter in the control group (Mean values: control group 82 s vs. intervention group 93 s; p = 0.000). In the CSA participants of the intervention group had a higher learning gain in 6 out of 11 items of the questionnaire (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: A "classic" BLS-course with a seminar and training seems superior to VR in teaching technical skills. However, overall learning gain was higher with VR. Future BLS course-formats should consider the integration of VR technique into the classic CPR training or vice versa, to use the advantage of both teaching techniques.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Virtual reality is an innovative technology for medical education associated with high empirical realism. Therefore, this study compares a conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training with a Virtual Reality (VR) training aiming to demonstrate: (a) non-inferiority of the VR intervention in respect of no flow time and (b) superiority in respect of subjective learning gain. METHODS: In this controlled randomized study first year, undergraduate students were allocated in the intervention group and the control group. Fifty-six participants were randomized to the intervention group and 104 participants to the control group. The intervention group received an individual 35-min VR Basic Life Support (BLS) course and a basic skill training. The control group took part in a "classic" BLS-course with a seminar and a basic skill training. The groups were compared in respect of no flow time in a final 3-min BLS examination (primary outcome) and their learning gain (secondary outcome) assessed with a comparative self-assessment (CSA) using a questionnaire at the beginning and the end of the course. Data analysis was performed with a general linear fixed effects model. RESULTS: The no flow time was significantly shorter in the control group (Mean values: control group 82 s vs. intervention group 93 s; p = 0.000). In the CSAparticipants of the intervention group had a higher learning gain in 6 out of 11 items of the questionnaire (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: A "classic" BLS-course with a seminar and training seems superior to VR in teaching technical skills. However, overall learning gain was higher with VR. Future BLS course-formats should consider the integration of VR technique into the classic CPR training or vice versa, to use the advantage of both teaching techniques.
Entities:
Keywords:
Basic life support training; Medical school; Resuscitation; Virtual reality
Authors: Jo Kramer-Johansen; Dana P Edelson; Heidrun Losert; Klemens Köhler; Benjamin S Abella Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2007-03-27 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Bentley J Bobrow; Lani L Clark; Gordon A Ewy; Vatsal Chikani; Arthur B Sanders; Robert A Berg; Peter B Richman; Karl B Kern Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-03-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: José Miguel Padilha; Paulo Puga Machado; Ana Ribeiro; José Ramos; Patrício Costa Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2019-03-18 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Parisa Moll-Khosrawi; Alexander Falb; Hans Pinnschmidt; Christian Zöllner; Malte Issleib Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2022-06-22 Impact factor: 3.263
Authors: Grace V Ryan; Shauna Callaghan; Anthony Rafferty; Mary F Higgins; Eleni Mangina; Fionnuala McAuliffe Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 5.428