Skip to content

Conventional vs Virtual Reality in laparoscopic training: a randomized controlled study

Conventional vs Virtual Reality in laparoscopic training: a randomized controlled study

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
DRKS
Registry ID
DRKS00036577
Enrollment
40
Registered
2025-04-09
Start date
2025-03-10
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-10-06

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

medical education, laparoscopic training, pediatric surgery

Interventions

Group 1: Control group: training videos with a 2D-view
tablet or smartphone used as screen with a 2D-view for training, access to training materials at any time
recordings for pre- and post-test with the device used as screen or an interconnected compatible device in a 2D-view. Over the course of three weeks, 6 training sessions: first session for answering t
last session with the post training test (performance of all the exercises) Group 2: Intervention group: training video recorded with a 360°-perspective for a 3D-impression of the room watched with th
training with the Meta Quest 3 Headset using an interconnected compatible device as a camera, access to training materials at any time
pre- and post-test with Meta Quest 3 Headset and recordings with the device used as camera or another interconnected compatible device in a 2D-view. Over the course of three weeks, 6 training sessions
last session with the post training test (performance of all the exercises)

Sponsors

Klinik für Kinder- und Jugendchirurgie Universitätsmedizin Mannheim
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: students, physicians, or laypersons no prior laparoscopic experience willingness to complete the training curriculum

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: attendance at a course in minimally invasive surgery involvement in study planning

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
he performance of both groups will be analysed according to the following criteria: the overall time to task completion, the time to task completion of each task and the errors/success made per task, which are defined in advance and documented in the study protocol.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Quality assessment: GOALS (Objective structured assessment of technical skill) OSATS (Objective structured assessment of technical skill) Satisfaction: QCM (Questionnaire on Current Motivation) by Rheinberg, Vollmeyer & Burns (2001) Experience: self-developed questionnaire with 12 items Musculoskeletal tension: Borg Musculoskeletal Scale (Borg et al. 1998) Mental load: NASA task load index (Hart et al. 1988)

Countries

Germany

Contacts

Public ContactOphelia Aubert

Klinik für Jugend- und Kinderchirurgie Mannheim

ophelia.aubert@umm.de+496213838758

Outcome results

None listed

Source: DRKS (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026