Educational Problems
Conditions
Keywords
Virtual Reality
Brief summary
This is a quantifiable study evaluating the ability of a mixed reality (MR), immersive simulation experience to evoke empathy in anesthesiology trainees. Quantitative methodologies will be employed using standardized questionnaires including the The Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy for Health Professions Students, (HP-version). Trainees will assess their preliminary, baseline empathy using the Jefferson Scale and after the simulation and debrief, will reassess empathy scores, once again using the Jefferson Scale. A satisfaction survey to assess simulated patient embodiment as a valuable exercise and contributor to empathy education curriculum.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALMixed Reality (MR)
Mixed Reality simulation of medical crisis scenarios. MR headset - a device that the participants will wear over their head and eyes and will add holographic elements to a live view of workplace training scenario
BEHAVIORALControl
Tradition simulation of medical crisis scenarios.
Sponsors
Stanford University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 99 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Trainees or personnel working and/or volunteering at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital Stanford / Stanford Health Care facilities * 18 years and older
Exclusion criteria
* a history of severe motion sickness * currently have nausea * have a history of seizures * are uncomfortable wearing a \~7 pound weighted vest.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Changes in self-reported empathy from before and after the simulation | baseline, immediately after the intervention | Measured with Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy for physicians and other practicing health professionals (HP-Version). The survey contains 20 item with 7-point scale, 1 indicates strongly disagree and 7 indicates strongly agree (a higher number on the scale indicates more agreement). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Satisfaction of Design Features of the Simulation | immediately after the intervention | Measured by Simulation Design Scale. The simulation design scale consists of 20 items in total. In the first stage, in order to evaluate whether the items used in the simulation method were given in the best way for the participant, they were expressed as strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly agree. The survey contains 20 item with 5-point scale, 1 indicates strongly disagree and 5 indicates strongly agree (a higher number on the scale indicates more agreement). In the second stage, there are statements that will determine the level of importance of the scale items for the participant, not important, partially important, undecided, important, very important. The survey contains 20 item with 5-point scale, 1 indicates not important and 5 indicates very important (a higher number on the scale indicates more important). In the evaluation phase, the scale score is calculated by dividing the total and the total of the sub-dimensions by the number of items. |
| Evaluation of the CHARM system's usability | immediately after simulation | Measured by System Usability Scale (SUS). The scale has 10 items. Scores ranges from 1-5 (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree) |
| Evaluation of the CHARM system's ergonomics | immediately after simulation | Measured by the ISO Ergonomic scale. The scale has 6 items. Scores ranges from 1-5 (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree) |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed