Virtual Reality and Medical EducationNCT04480489
Testing Efficacy of VR in Medical Education
A study testing VR and Traditional in people with Virtual Reality and Medical Education, run by University Health Network, Toronto.
Trial summary
Recent emergence and commercialization of immersive virtual reality (VR) shows great promise in its application to medical education. While the technology is rapidly developing, we don't yet know how we learn in an immersive environment. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 22 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Virtual Reality and Medical Education
- What is being tested?
- VR and Traditional
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 40 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 28 Aug 2020to 23 Oct 2020
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 22 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Pre-clerkship (year 1 and 2) medical students from the University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine.
Who cannot join
- Any medical students who have had experience visiting Toronto Western Hospital for personal reasons or previous coursework, shadowing, research, or clinical rotations.
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet.
About this study
Official title: The Efficacy of Immersive 360-degree Video in Improving Spatial Orientation Among Medical Students
Recent emergence and commercialization of immersive virtual reality (VR) shows great promise in its application to medical education. While the technology is rapidly developing, we don't yet know how we learn in an immersive environment. As a result, this study will investigate how medical students at the University of Toronto learn from immersive 360-degree video (i.e. VR) when compared to standard 2D video. The task to learn will be hospital (i.e. Toronto Western Hospital) navigation.
Read the detailed description
The recent emergence and commercialization of immersive virtual reality (VR) shows great promise in its application to medical education. While several surgical, critical care, and procedural 'virtual reality simulators' are described, very few immersive VR experiences that use 360-degree videos have been described (Alakar et al., 2016; Zhu et al., 2014). 360-degree video is a form of virtual reality that shows video content in a globe creating a sense of immersion and realism that is not possible in standard 2D-videos. The videos are viewed using a virtual reality headset capable of displaying the 360-degree content. Among the few studies that do describe immersive learning experiences in medical training, very few have explored the modality from a pedagogical perspective (Barsom et al., 2017; Cha et al, 2006). It is still unclear whether learning via an immersive experience through 360-degree videos is better than traditional methods such as 2D videos.
The use of traditional 2D video is quite well established in medical education as it enhances knowledge transfer, communication skills, attitude formation, and appeals to learners with various learning styles (Abraham et al, 2011; de Leng et al., 2007). Videos are commonly used for clinical skills training as they provide standardized and consistent learning experiences (Flores et al., 2010; Knowles et al., 2001). They can also be used as resources for 'just-in-time' learning, where students preview content by watching videos before attending didactic or hands-on sessions. Patient case videos allow for rare clinical scenarios to be available to students in perpetuity (Gagliano, 1988). The use of video has allowed for the delivery of educational content in both asynchronous and synchronous (i.e. live or real-time) formats allowing for streaming of video to distant locations with real-time dialogue at all sites (Bridge et al., 2009; Gandsas et al., 2004). These advantages of video have enabled the rapid expansion of some medical schools to multiple hospitals. As medical students rotate through these sites during their clinical years, they often face the challenge of adjusting to unfamiliar environments. Anecdotal as well as survey feedback from our site suggests that unfamiliarity with a new environment induces anxiety among trainees and may result in some 'false' starts on the first day of the rotations. Furthermore, the unfamiliarity may cause students to get lost and arrive late to their clinical assignments. Current solutions include text-based directions for way-finding and orientation, which are at times are supplemented by photographs and standard 2-dimensional video. The realism of 360-degree videos may provide a sense of direction with better wayfinding skills because it will allow the learner to explore and 'experience' the depicted location. To date, there is no study reported comparing 2D with 360-degree video on wayfinding and the orientation experience for medical students.
The use of video to assist with wayfinding and orientation exists but is not currently reported in the literature. Spofford et al. (2012) conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the utility of standard lecture and 2D video in orienting students to the anesthesia machine and the operating room setup. The orientation 2D video group performed significantly better with higher post-test scores but scored lower on satisfaction as students preferred the traditional lecture. The study did not assess the utility of orientation videos for wayfinding. Furthermore, the efficacy in improving spatial orientation, reducing anxiety, or enhancing the orientation process is not well known.
Hypothesis: 360-degree videos will enhance spatial orientation of medical students by:
- Improving way-finding and sense of orientation
- Conferring a sense of presence
- Increasing level of satisfaction with the learning experience
- Decreasing anxiety with a new environment
Methods:
This will be a prospective randomized controlled trial. Pre-clerkship (year 1 and 2) medical students from the University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine will be recruited to take part in the study. Participants will complete a baseline questionnaire collecting data quantifying key potentially confounding factors such as previous 360 videos, previous visits to Toronto Western Hospital, physical gait disability, and navigation experience.
Students will be randomized to two groups (see below) and given video orientation for each route. It takes approximately 4 minutes to walk each one.
Route 1: Conference room 2nd floor to the Day Surgery Unit on the 4th floor. Route 2: Anesthesia lounge on 2nd floor to preoperative assessment clinic on the ground floor to the operating rooms on the 2nd floor
The goal of having each group complete different routes is to assess internal validity within each group when given traditional vs. VR instructions. Group 1 and 2 will also be compared to assess which learning method is superior.
- Conditions
- Virtual Reality and Medical Education
- Being tested
- VR, Traditional
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
VROther
Task 1: Students will be first taken to the anesthesia lounge. Here the students will receive VR instructions on how to navigate Route 1 (i.e. they will watch a 360-degree immersive video using Samsung VR headset).
Task 2: After completing the Route 1 walkthrough, the same group will be given traditional instructions (2D video) on navigating Route 2, followed by an observed walkthrough of Route 2.
Students in the arm "Group A" will perform Task 1 using VR and then Task 2 using Traditional video. Meanwhile students in the arm "Group B" will perform Task 1 using Traditional video and Task 2 using VR
TraditionalOther
Task 1: Students will be first taken to the anesthesia lounge. Here the students will receive traditional instructions (2D video) on how to navigate Route 1.
Task 2: After completing the Route 1 walkthrough, the same group will be given VR instructions on how to navigate Route 2, followed by an observed walkthrough of Route 2.
Students in the arm "Group A" will perform Task 1 using VR and then Task 2 using Traditional video. Meanwhile students in the arm "Group B" will perform Task 1 using Traditional video and Task 2 using VR
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Group A | Experimental | In Group A, students will first perform Task 1 (walk from anesthesia lounge to the day surgery unit) using intervention 1 (using the virtual reality video) first, then Task 2 (walk from anesthesia lounge to the pre-operative clinic) using intervention 2 (using the traditional 2D video). Receives: Other: VR; Other: Traditional |
| group B | Active comparator | In Group B, students will first perform Task 1 (follow route 1: walk from anesthesia lounge to the day surgery unit) using intervention 2 (using the traditional 2D video) first, then Task 2 (follow route 2: walk from anesthesia lounge to the pre-operative clinic) using intervention 1 (using the virtual reality video). Receives: Other: VR; Other: Traditional |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Time assessment
A research assistant will follow and time how long it takes the medical student to travel from the starting to end point.
Measured: End of the study (2 hours)
Secondary outcomes (3)
Distance assessment
The number of steps and distance travelled will be measured using a standardized pedometer.
Measured: End of the study (2 hours)
Number of wrong turns/wrong floors/doors entered
Way finding corrective measures
Measured: End of the study (2 hours)
Number of times student asks for help.
Way finding corrective measures
Measured: End of the study (2 hours)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Jul 2020
- Study start28 Aug 2020 (estimated)
- Primary completion2 Oct 2020 (estimated)
- Study completion23 Oct 2020 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Virtual Reality and Medical EducationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University Health Network, TorontoThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Prospective randomized controlled trial. Pre-clerkship (year 1 and 2) medical students from the University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine will be recruited to take part in the study. Participants will complete a baseline questionnaire collecting data quantifying key potentially confounding factors such as previous 360 videos, previous visits to Toronto Western Hospital, physical gait disability, and navigation experience. A 2x2 study design will be used to implement counterbalancing as a way to control for two important sources of systematic variation in this type of study: practice and boredom effects
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University Health Network, Toronto
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- AHTSHAM NIAZI, Principal investigator, University Health Network, Toronto
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04480489
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 19-5565
- Status last verified
- Jul 2020
- First submitted
- 17 Jul 2020
- Last updated
- 21 Jul 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Individual participant data will not be shared to preserve student privacy and confidentiality throughout the course of the study and the feedback they share at the end of the study. The students however will be provided access to both the VR and the traditional 2D hospital orientation videos once the study is complete.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Jul 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Efficacy of Immersive 360-degree Video in Improving Spatial Orientation Among Medical Students
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04480489
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 19-5565
- Conditions
- Virtual Reality and Medical Education
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University Health Network, TorontoUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 28 Aug 2020 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 2 Oct 2020 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 23 Oct 2020 (estimated)
- First posted
- 21 Jul 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Recent emergence and commercialization of immersive virtual reality (VR) shows great promise in its application to medical education. While the technology is rapidly developing, we don't yet know how we learn in an immersive environment. As a result, this study will investigate how medical students at the University of Toronto learn from immersive 360-degree video (i.e. VR) when compared to standard 2D video. The task to learn will be hospital (i.e. Toronto Western Hospital) navigation.
Detailed description
The recent emergence and commercialization of immersive virtual reality (VR) shows great promise in its application to medical education. While several surgical, critical care, and procedural 'virtual reality simulators' are described, very few immersive VR experiences that use 360-degree videos have been described (Alakar et al., 2016; Zhu et al., 2014). 360-degree video is a form of virtual reality that shows video content in a globe creating a sense of immersion and realism that is not possible in standard 2D-videos. The videos are viewed using a virtual reality headset capable of displaying the 360-degree content. Among the few studies that do describe immersive learning experiences in medical training, very few have explored the modality from a pedagogical perspective (Barsom et al., 2017; Cha et al, 2006). It is still unclear whether learning via an immersive experience through 360-degree videos is better than traditional methods such as 2D videos.
The use of traditional 2D video is quite well established in medical education as it enhances knowledge transfer, communication skills, attitude formation, and appeals to learners with various learning styles (Abraham et al, 2011; de Leng et al., 2007). Videos are commonly used for clinical skills training as they provide standardized and consistent learning experiences (Flores et al., 2010; Knowles et al., 2001). They can also be used as resources for 'just-in-time' learning, where students preview content by watching videos before attending didactic or hands-on sessions. Patient case videos allow for rare clinical scenarios to be available to students in perpetuity (Gagliano, 1988). The use of video has allowed for the delivery of educational content in both asynchronous and synchronous (i.e. live or real-time) formats allowing for streaming of video to distant locations with real-time dialogue at all sites (Bridge et al., 2009; Gandsas et al., 2004). These advantages of video have enabled the rapid expansion of some medical schools to multiple hospitals. As medical students rotate through these sites during their clinical years, they often face the challenge of adjusting to unfamiliar environments. Anecdotal as well as survey feedback from our site suggests that unfamiliarity with a new environment induces anxiety among trainees and may result in some 'false' starts on the first day of the rotations. Furthermore, the unfamiliarity may cause students to get lost and arrive late to their clinical assignments. Current solutions include text-based directions for way-finding and orientation, which are at times are supplemented by photographs and standard 2-dimensional video. The realism of 360-degree videos may provide a sense of direction with better wayfinding skills because it will allow the learner to explore and 'experience' the depicted location. To date, there is no study reported comparing 2D with 360-degree video on wayfinding and the orientation experience for medical students.
The use of video to assist with wayfinding and orientation exists but is not currently reported in the literature. Spofford et al. (2012) conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the utility of standard lecture and 2D video in orienting students to the anesthesia machine and the operating room setup. The orientation 2D video group performed significantly better with higher post-test scores but scored lower on satisfaction as students preferred the traditional lecture. The study did not assess the utility of orientation videos for wayfinding. Furthermore, the efficacy in improving spatial orientation, reducing anxiety, or enhancing the orientation process is not well known.
Hypothesis: 360-degree videos will enhance spatial orientation of medical students by:
- Improving way-finding and sense of orientation
- Conferring a sense of presence
- Increasing level of satisfaction with the learning experience
- Decreasing anxiety with a new environment
Methods:
This will be a prospective randomized controlled trial. Pre-clerkship (year 1 and 2) medical students from the University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine will be recruited to take part in the study. Participants will complete a baseline questionnaire collecting data quantifying key potentially confounding factors such as previous 360 videos, previous visits to Toronto Western Hospital, physical gait disability, and navigation experience.
Students will be randomized to two groups (see below) and given video orientation for each route. It takes approximately 4 minutes to walk each one.
Route 1: Conference room 2nd floor to the Day Surgery Unit on the 4th floor. Route 2: Anesthesia lounge on 2nd floor to preoperative assessment clinic on the ground floor to the operating rooms on the 2nd floor
The goal of having each group complete different routes is to assess internal validity within each group when given traditional vs. VR instructions. Group 1 and 2 will also be compared to assess which learning method is superior.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Prospective randomized controlled trial. Pre-clerkship (year 1 and 2) medical students from the University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine will be recruited to take part in the study. Participants will complete a baseline questionnaire collecting data quantifying key potentially confounding factors such as previous 360 videos, previous visits to Toronto Western Hospital, physical gait disability, and navigation experience. A 2x2 study design will be used to implement counterbalancing as a way to control for two important sources of systematic variation in this type of study: practice and boredom effects
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Group A | Experimental | Other: VR, Other: TraditionalIn Group A, students will first perform Task 1 (walk from anesthesia lounge to the day surgery unit) using intervention 1 (using the virtual reality video) first, then Task 2 (walk from anesthesia lounge to the pre-operative clinic) using intervention 2 (using the traditional 2D video). |
| group B | Active comparator | Other: VR, Other: TraditionalIn Group B, students will first perform Task 1 (follow route 1: walk from anesthesia lounge to the day surgery unit) using intervention 2 (using the traditional 2D video) first, then Task 2 (follow route 2: walk from anesthesia lounge to the pre-operative clinic) using intervention 1 (using the virtual reality video). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 22 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Pre-clerkship (year 1 and 2) medical students from the University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Any medical students who have had experience visiting Toronto Western Hospital for personal reasons or previous coursework, shadowing, research, or clinical rotations.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| VRTask 1: Students will be first taken to the anesthesia lounge. Here the students will receive VR instructions on how to navigate Route 1 (i.e. they will watch a 360-degree immersive video using Samsung VR headset). Task 2: After completing the Route 1 walkthrough, the same group will be given traditional instructions (2D video) on navigating Route 2, followed by an observed walkthrough of Route 2. Students in the arm "Group A" will perform Task 1 using VR and then Task 2 using Traditional video. Meanwhile students in the arm "Group B" will perform Task 1 using Traditional video and Task 2 using VR | Other | Group A, group B |
| TraditionalTask 1: Students will be first taken to the anesthesia lounge. Here the students will receive traditional instructions (2D video) on how to navigate Route 1. Task 2: After completing the Route 1 walkthrough, the same group will be given VR instructions on how to navigate Route 2, followed by an observed walkthrough of Route 2. Students in the arm "Group A" will perform Task 1 using VR and then Task 2 using Traditional video. Meanwhile students in the arm "Group B" will perform Task 1 using Traditional video and Task 2 using VR | Other | Group A, group B |
Primary outcome
Time assessment
Time frame: End of the study (2 hours)
A research assistant will follow and time how long it takes the medical student to travel from the starting to end point.
3 secondary outcomes
Distance assessment
Time frame: End of the study (2 hours)
Number of wrong turns/wrong floors/doors entered
Time frame: End of the study (2 hours)
Number of times student asks for help.
Time frame: End of the study (2 hours)
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 21 Jul 2020.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Individual participant data will not be shared to preserve student privacy and confidentiality throughout the course of the study and the feedback they share at the end of the study. The students however will be provided access to both the VR and the traditional 2D hospital orientation videos once the study is complete.
Related trials for Virtual Reality and Medical Education
Active, not recruiting
Virtual Reality-Based Simulation Versus High-Fidelity Simulation for Emergency Management Training in Medical Interns
Anaphylaxis, Hypoxia
Recruiting
Using Virtual Reality to Improve Medical Training
Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM), Geriatric Syndromes
Recruiting
Is Two-on-one Instruction in Virtual Reality Simulation-based Training of Operating Fractures of the Hip for Medical Students as Effective as One-on-one Instruction
Learning Curves and Outcomes of Simulation-based Training
Recruiting
Virtual vs. Traditional CPR Training: Effects on Stress
Heart Rate Variability, Biomarker of Stress, Stress and Anxiety
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
AHTSHAM NIAZI principal investigator
University Health Network, Toronto
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing VR and Traditional in people with Virtual Reality and Medical Education, run by University Health Network, Toronto.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 21 Jul 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Rongyu (Cindy) Jin (416-603-5800 Ext. 2016, rongyu.jin@uhn.ca), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Time assessment (time frame: End of the study (2 hours)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 21 Jul 2020.