• Respiration · Mar 2003

    Evaluation of virtual reality bronchoscopy as a learning and assessment tool.

    • K Moorthy, S Smith, T Brown, S Bann, and A Darzi.
    • Department of Surgical Oncology and Technology, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, London, UK. kmoorthy@ic.ac.uk
    • Respiration. 2003 Mar 1; 70 (2): 195-9.

    BackgroundConventional training in bronchoscopy involves a trainee performing on a real patient under supervision. This method of training is not only expensive, but there is also potential for increased patient discomfort. Simulators permit the acquisition of necessary technical skills required for the procedure. Virtual reality (VR) has been an integral part of training in aviation, and the application of this technology in medical training needs to be evaluated.ObjectiveThis study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of a VR bronchoscopy simulator as a learning and assessment tool.MethodsThe bronchoscopic simulator (HT Medical Systems, Maryland, USA) is a VR computer programme. The simulator has the ability to assess competence by a set of parameters, which formed the data for the study. Nine novices without previous bronchoscopic experience formed the study group (group 1). Nine experienced bronchoscopists having performed between 200 and 1000 bronchoscopies formed the other group (group 2). We assessed the efficacy of the system as a learning tool by studying whether there was a significant difference between the first and subsequent sessions of the subjects from group 1 and by comparing the performance of the two groups. Statistical analysis was done using the Mann-Whitney U test and the Wilcoxon signed ranks test.ResultsThere was a significant difference in performance between the first attempt of group 1 and the performance of the experts in terms of percentage of segments visualised and number of wall collisions and the economy of performance. Among the subjects from group 1, there was a significant improvement in percentage of segments visualised by the third attempt (p = 0.04), in the economy of performance by the sixth attempt (0.008) and in the number of wall collisions by the sixth attempt (0.024). When each attempt of the novices was compared with the performance of group 2, the significance in the difference of the percentage of segments studied (p = 0.09) and the economy of performance disappeared by the third attempt (0.06), while the difference in the number of wall collisions disappeared by the fifth attempt (p = 0.06).ConclusionsThis study has been able to establish the face, construct and content validity of the simulator and the potential for it to be an effective training tool.Copyright 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.