One main benefit of this platform is the case-authoring tool available that allows clients the ability to recreate and assign scenarios to users at will, making it an excellent resource for remediation and high-risk patient interaction practice. Having the ability to recreate and alter specific patient interactions for practitioners to learn from mistakes can be invaluable in a well-trained educator’s hands.

A recent publication highlighted the use of VR Patients, assessing the efficacy of the tool in comparison to traditional in-person simulation.¹¹ Researchers, using scenarios from the National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians (NAEMT), created six scenarios in virtual reality. 203 paramedic students from across the United States completed the six scenarios using VR or traditional in-person simulation. The results of this study showed that there was not a statistically significant difference in exam scores between VR and traditional simulation. This suggests that students benefit just as much from the use of VR simulation as from traditional in-person simulation.

Another notable article published in the Australasian Journal of Educational Technology highlighted the use of 3D printing as a way to bridge the gap between the virtual and physical educational environments.¹² Students from a paramedic-education distance program were struggling with a lack of opportunities to practice hands-on skills like intubation. In response to this struggle, a 3D printer was used to make representations of a Macintosh laryngoscope blade with handle and Magill forceps. Students were sent one 3D-printed intubation kit, as well as a Color-Cross universal mobile phone VR headset. Using the tools provided, students were able to get hands-on practice while immersed in a virtual environment throughout their distance-education program. Results from this study showed that the students who had access to 3D-printed devices and VR scored higher on key performance indicators. These simulation techniques could easily be translated to physician-learners.

Conclusion

Technological advancements have exponentially increased the opportunities for practitioners, students, and educators. The potential advantages of including virtual, augmented, or mixed reality into training in medical education are limited only by the imagination of the educator.

Erin Donathan is adjunct faculty with the public safety and emergency services institute at Pima Community College in Tucson, Ariz.

References

1. Carroll AE, Buddenbaum JL. High and low-risk specialties experience with the U.S. medical malpractice system. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13:465.
2. Lenzer J. Obituary: Peter Josef Safar. BMJ. 2003;327(7415):624.
3. Sanford PG. Simulation in nursing education: a review of the research. The Qualitative Report. 2010;15(4):1006-1011.
4. Blackstock FC, Watson KM, Morris NR, et al. Simulation can contribute a part of cardiorespiratory physiotherapy clinical education: Two randomized trials. Simul Healthc. 2013;8(1):32-42.
5. Durmaz A, Dicle A, Cakan E, et al. Effect of screen-based computer simulation on knowledge and skill in nursing students‘ learning of preoperative and postoperative care management: A randomized controlled study. Comput Inform Nurs. 2012;30(4):196-203.
6. Maneval R, Fowler KA, Kays JA, et al. The effect of high-fidelity patient simulation on the critical thinking and clinical decision-making skills of new graduate nurses. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2012;43(3):125-134.
7. Goodstone L, Goodstone MS, Cino K, et al. Effect of simulation on the development of critical thinking in associate degree nursing students. Nurs Educ Perspect. 2013;34(3):159-162.
8. Sullivan-Mann J, Perron CA, Fellner AN. The effects of simulation on nursing students’ critical thinking scores: A quantitative study. Newborn Infant Nurs Rev.2009;9(2):111.
9. Macauley K, Brudvig TJ, Kadakia M, et al. Systematic review of assessments that evaluate clinical decision making, clinical reasoning, and critical thinking changes after simulation participation. Journal of Physical Therapy Education. 2017;31(4):64-75.
10. Kononowicz AA, Woodham LA, Edelbring S, et al. Virtual patient simulations in health professions education: systematic review and meta-analysis by the digital health education collaboration. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(7):e14676.
11. Donathan E, LaLumia A, Foat C, et al. *SMARTSIM* A multicenter prospective randomized trial of 3D virtual reality versus traditional patient simulation. JACEP Open. 2024;5:e13092.
12. Birt J, Moore E, Cowling M. Improving paramedic distance education through monocle mixed reality simulation. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,2017;33(6):69-83.