| Literature DB >> 35057782 |
Hui-Ting Lin1, Hsin-Jen Tsai2, Yen-I Li3, Wen-Pin Hu4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pelvic movement training has become compulsory for part of medical students. An increasing amount of research has focused on the influence of virtual reality (VR) on learning effectiveness. However, its application to pelvic floor muscles or pelvic movement training is still in its infancy. We compared the effectiveness of conventional pelvic movement training with or without VR-assisted pelvic movement training for student learning.Entities:
Keywords: Motor learning; Pelvic movement training; Virtual reality
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35057782 PMCID: PMC8772223 DOI: 10.1186/s12909-022-03109-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Educ ISSN: 1472-6920 Impact factor: 2.463
Fig. 1Flow chart of participants
Fig. 2Pelvic clock exercise
Fig. 3Preset trajectories of the three types of pelvic movements. a in sitting posture b in hooking lying posture
Fig. 4Order of the pelvic clock movements in the experimental group. Participants should repeat each set of movements three times
Fig. 5Participant in the experimental group playing Wii Fit Plus TM games
Participants’ demographic and characteristics at baseline (mean ± standard deviation)
| Experimental group (n = 22) | Traditional group (n = 22) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 19.55±0.18 | 19.95±0.59 | 0.861a |
| Sex (male:female) | 08:14 | 08:14 | 1.000c |
| Height (centimeter) | 164.86±1.78 | 165±1.65 | 0.955b |
| Weight (kilogram) | 59.61±2.23 | 59.3±2.83 | 0.541a |
| Ischium tuberosity widths (centimeter) | 13.9±0.53 | 14.36±0.45 | 0.512b |
| Low back pain in the preceding 3 months (people) | 5 | 5 | 1.000c |
| Baseline value of the written examination (points) | 35.45±27.56 | 50.91±28.77 | 0.076b |
| Baseline value of the practical examination (points) | 47.18±18.75 | 40.32±16.51 | 0.205b |
a Mann-Whitney U test. b Independent sample t test. c Chi square analysis
Fig. 6Time×Group interaction demonstrated in the written examinations (means and standard deviation bars are shown)
Practical examination scores (points)
| Variable | Category | Mean(95% Confidence Interval) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Group | experimental group | 76.27(70.84-81.71) | 0.003 |
| traditional group | 64.21(58.78-69.65) | ||
| Time | pretest | 43.75(38.37-49.13) | <0.001 |
| posttest | 86.32(82.78-89.87) | 0.033 | |
| follow-up test | 80.66(74.97-86.35) |
values are presented for the differences between categories
a Post hoc tests revealed significant differences between pretest and posttest on Time categories
b Post hoc tests revealed significant differences between pretest and follow-up test on Time categories
c Post hoc tests revealed significant differences between posttest and follow-up test on Time categories
Fig. 7Questionnaire horizontal bar chart