Virtual reality applications: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 09:34, 13 June 2025

Revision as of 17:05, 17 June 2025

Line 108:

Other studies in VR have used VR to improve Type and Screen (T&S) procedural training for medical practitioners, addressing the challenges of traditional training methods. T&S is critical for blood typing and antibody screening to ensure patient safety during transfusions.<ref name=":25">{{Cite journal |last1=Tang |first1=Yuk Ming |last2=Ng |first2=George Wing Yiu |last3=Chia |first3=Nam Hung |last4=So |first4=Eric Hang Kwong |last5=Wu |first5=Chun Ho |last6=Ip |first6=Wai Hung |date=2020-10-04 |title=Application of virtual reality ( VR ) technology for medical practitioners in type and screen (T&S) training |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.12494 |journal=Journal of Computer Assisted Learning |language=en |volume=37 |issue=2 |pages=359–369 |doi=10.1111/jcal.12494 |hdl=10397/94594 |issn=0266-4909|hdl-access=free }}</ref> The traditional training method is "See One, Do One, Teach One" or SODOTO, which tends to fall short due to a limited amount of teachers and resources. In order to tackle this problem, a VR-based training program was created and developed using Unity3D, allowing surgeons to train through an effective, safe, and repeatable alternative.<ref name=":25" /> This VR system came with a head-mounted display and Leap Motion Controller, which simulated a hospital environment. There was also full equipment, procedures, and realistic blood drawing and sterilization. Additionally, error notifications and progress reports enhanced this training experience.<ref name=":25" /> The three main factors that were studied through this experiment were content, motivation, and readiness, and the statistical analysis throughout this study confirmed strong correlations between these factors and the program’s reliability and impact.<ref name=":25" /> This is one of the many cases where combining VR with traditional training can really enhance practical skills and prepare surgeons for their future.

Lastly, there was a study done on two VR platforms, Oculus and Gear VR, to evaluate their effectiveness in teaching medical and health science students about spinal anatomy.<ref name=":26">{{Cite journal |last1=Moro |first1=Christian |last2=Štromberga |first2=Zane |last3=Stirling |first3=Allan |date=2017-11-29 |title=Virtualisation devices for student learning: Comparison between desktop-based (Oculus Rift) and mobile-based (Gear VR) virtual reality in medical and health science education |url=https://ajet.org.au/index.php/AJET/article/view/3840 |journal=Australasian Journal of Educational Technology |language=en |volume=33 |issue=6 |doi=10.14742/ajet.3840 |issn=1449-5554|doi-access=free }}</ref> It examined the performance of student perceptions and the potential side effects associated with each device. While there are a lot of benefits to using VR technology, there are also some adverse effects such as nausea and blurred vision.<ref name=":26" /> Especially he participants using the Gear VR technology.<ref name=":26" /> This group ended up experiencing up to 40% more issues compared to the Oculus Rift group. Even with many drawbacks, this study highlighted that mobile-based Gear VR is the cost-effective alternative to Oculus Rift. The findings of this student indicate that even with mobile VR devices, medical students can train for a more practical and affordable price.<ref name=":26" /> Future implementations of this study can consider the tradeoffs between using VR platforms for education, mobile VR platforms for education, and in-person training for medical education.

Some potential future challenges of this technology would be enhancing complex scenarios alongside the realism aspects. These technologies would need to incorporate stress-inducing factors along with other realistic simulation ideas. Furthermore, there would be a strong need to keep things cost-effective with an abundance of availability.<ref name=":23" />