Virtual reality as a teaching method for resuscitation training in undergraduate first year medical students: a randomized controlled trial

Standard

Virtual reality as a teaching method for resuscitation training in undergraduate first year medical students: a randomized controlled trial. / Issleib, Malte; Kromer, Alina; Pinnschmidt, Hans O; Süss-Havemann, Christoph; Kubitz, Jens C.

In: SCAND J TRAUMA RESUS, Vol. 29, No. 1, 01.02.2021, p. 27.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journalSCORING: Journal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{450cecfc4336424fb418ece86feba026,
title = "Virtual reality as a teaching method for resuscitation training in undergraduate first year medical students: a randomized controlled trial",
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.",
author = "Malte Issleib and Alina Kromer and Pinnschmidt, {Hans O} and Christoph S{\"u}ss-Havemann and Kubitz, {Jens C}",
year = "2021",
month = feb,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1186/s13049-021-00836-y",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "27",
journal = "SCAND J TRAUMA RESUS",
issn = "1757-7241",
publisher = "BioMed Central Ltd.",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Virtual reality as a teaching method for resuscitation training in undergraduate first year medical students: a randomized controlled trial

AU - Issleib, Malte

AU - Kromer, Alina

AU - Pinnschmidt, Hans O

AU - Süss-Havemann, Christoph

AU - Kubitz, Jens C

PY - 2021/2/1

Y1 - 2021/2/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

U2 - 10.1186/s13049-021-00836-y

DO - 10.1186/s13049-021-00836-y

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 33526042

VL - 29

SP - 27

JO - SCAND J TRAUMA RESUS

JF - SCAND J TRAUMA RESUS

SN - 1757-7241

IS - 1

ER -