• Medicine · Oct 2023

    Randomized Controlled Trial

    Cost-effectiveness of virtual reality and wet laboratory cataract surgery simulation.

    • Danny S Ng, YipBenjamin H KBHKThe Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China., Alvin L Young, YipWilson W KWWKDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong, China., Nai M Lam, Kenneth K Li, Simon T Ko, Wai H Chan, Orapan Aryasit, Shameema Sikder, John D Ferris, Chi P Pang, and Clement C Tham.
    • Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
    • Medicine (Baltimore). 2023 Oct 6; 102 (40): e35067e35067.

    PurposeTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of phacoemulsification simulation training in virtual reality simulator and wet laboratory on operating theater performance.MethodsResidents were randomized to a combination of virtual reality and wet laboratory phacoemulsification or wet laboratory phacoemulsification. A reference control group consisted of trainees who had wet laboratory training without phacoemulsification. All trainees were assessed on operating theater performance in 3 sequential cataract patients. International Council of Ophthalmology Surgical Competency Assessment Rubric-phacoemulsification (ICO OSCAR phaco) scores by 2 masked independent graders and cost data were used to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A decision model was constructed to indicate the most cost-effective simulation training strategy based on the willingness to pay (WTP) per ICO OSCAR phaco score gained.ResultsTwenty-two trainees who performed phacoemulsification in 66 patients were analyzed. Trainees who had additional virtual reality simulation achieved higher mean ICO OSCAR phaco scores compared with trainees who had wet laboratory phacoemulsification and control (49.5 ± standard deviation [SD] 9.8 vs 39.0 ± 15.8 vs 32.5 ± 12.1, P < .001). Compared with the control group, ICER per ICO OSCAR phaco of wet laboratory phacoemulsification was $13,473 for capital cost and $2209 for recurring cost. Compared with wet laboratory phacoemulsification, ICER per ICO OSCAR phaco of additional virtual reality simulator training was US $23,778 for capital cost and $1879 for recurring cost. The threshold WTP values per ICO OSCAR phaco score for combined virtual reality simulator and wet laboratory phacoemulsification to be most cost-effective was $22,500 for capital cost and $1850 for recurring cost.ConclusionsCombining virtual reality simulator with wet laboratory phacoemulsification training is effective for skills transfer in the operating theater. Despite of the high capital cost of virtual reality simulator, its relatively low recurring cost is more favorable toward cost-effectiveness.Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

      Pubmed     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.