scholarly journals Virtual Reality Simulation Training for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation after Cardiac Surgery: Face and Content Validity Study (Preprint)

10.2196/30456 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amir Hossein Sadeghi ◽  
Jette Jansje Peek ◽  
Samuel Max ◽  
Liselot Lorijn Smit ◽  
Bryan G. Martina ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amir Hossein Sadeghi ◽  
Jette Jansje Peek ◽  
Samuel Max ◽  
Bryan G. Martina ◽  
Rodney A. Rosalia ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND Cardiac arrest after cardiac surgery commonly has a reversible cause, where often emergency re-sternotomy is required for treatment, as recommended by international guidelines. We have developed a virtual reality (VR) simulation for training of CPR and emergency re-sternotomy procedures after cardiac surgery, the CardioPulmonary resuscitation VR-simulator (CPVR-sim). In this prospective study, we researched face validity and content validity of this CPVR-sim. OBJECTIVE We designed a prospective study to assess the feasibility and to establish the face and content validity of CPVR-sim in a group of novices and experts in performing CPR and emergency re-sternotomies in patients after cardiac surgery. METHODS Thirty clinicians (staff cardiothoracic surgeons, physicians, surgical residents, and nurse practitioners) participated as either an expert or novice, based on experience with emergency re-sternotomy. All performed the simulation and completed the questionnaire rating the simulator’s usefulness, satisfaction, ease of use, effectiveness, and immersiveness to assess face validity and content validity. RESULTS Responses towards face validity and content validity were predominantly positive in both groups. Most participants felt actively involved (97%), in charge of the situation (73%), it was easy to learn how to interact with the software (80%), and the software responded well (70%). Almost all expert-participants preferred VR training as a substitute to conventional (100%) and digital (60% agreed and 40% was neutral) training. Moreover, 86% of the expert-participants would recommend VR training to other colleagues, and 93% found that CPVR-sim is a useful method to train infrequent CPR-cases after cardiac surgery. CONCLUSIONS We developed a proof-of-concept of a VR simulation for CPR training after cardiac surgery, which participants found was immersive and useful. By proving the face validity and content validity of CPVR-sim, we present a first step towards a cardiothoracic surgery VR training platform.


Endoscopy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (07) ◽  
pp. 653-664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rishad Khan ◽  
Joanne Plahouras ◽  
Bradley C. Johnston ◽  
Michael A. Scaffidi ◽  
Samir C. Grover ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Endoscopy programs are increasingly integrating simulation training. We conducted a systematic review to determine whether virtual reality (VR) simulation training can supplement and/or replace conventional patient-based endoscopy training for health professional trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience. Methods We searched medical, educational, and computer literature databases in July 2017 for trials that compared VR simulation training with no training, conventional training, another form of simulation training, or an alternative method of VR training. We screened, abstracted data, and performed quantitative analysis and quality assessment through Cochrane methodology. Results We included 18 trials with 3817 endoscopic procedures. VR training provided no advantage over no training or conventional training based on the primary outcome of composite score of competency. VR training was advantageous over no training based on independent procedure completion (relative risk [RR] = 1.62, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.15 – 2.26, moderate-quality evidence), overall rating of performance (mean difference [MD] 0.45, 95 %CI 0.15 – 0.75, very low-quality evidence), and mucosal visualization (MD 0.60, 95 %CI 0.20 – 1.00, very low-quality evidence). Compared with conventional training, VR training resulted in fewer independent procedure completions (RR = 0.45, 95 %CI 0.27 – 0.74, low-quality evidence). We found no differences between VR training and no training or conventional training for other outcomes. Based on qualitative analysis, we found no significant differences between VR training and other forms of simulation training. VR curricula based in educational theory provided benefit with respect to composite score of competency, compared with unstructured curricula. Conclusions VR simulation training is advantageous over no training and can supplement conventional endoscopy training. There is insufficient evidence that simulation training provides benefit over conventional training.


2018 ◽  
Vol 87 (6) ◽  
pp. AB614
Author(s):  
Rishad Khan ◽  
Joanne Plahouras ◽  
Bradley Johnston ◽  
Michael A. Scaffidi ◽  
Samir C. Grover ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (9) ◽  
pp. 2547-2554 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergio E. A. Araujo ◽  
Conor P. Delaney ◽  
Victor E. Seid ◽  
Antonio R. Imperiale ◽  
Alexandre B. Bertoncini ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document