Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2023 Dec 1;278(6):850-857.
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006079. Epub 2023 Aug 28.

Collaborative Team Training in Virtual Reality is Superior to Individual Learning For Performing Complex Open Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Thomas C Edwards  1 , Daniella Soussi, Shubham Gupta, Sikandar Khan, Arjun Patel, Amogh Patil, Alexander D Liddle, Justin P Cobb, Kartik Logishetty
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Collaborative Team Training in Virtual Reality is Superior to Individual Learning For Performing Complex Open Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Thomas C Edwards et al. Ann Surg. .

Abstract

Objective: To assess whether multiplayer immersive Virtual Reality (iVR) training was superior to single-player training for the acquisition of both technical and nontechnical skills in learning complex surgery.

Background: Superior teamwork in the operating room (OR) is associated with improved technical performance and clinical outcomes. iVR can successfully train OR staff individually; however, iVR team training has yet to be investigated.

Methods: Forty participants were randomized to individual or team iVR training. Individually trained participants practiced alongside virtual avatar counterparts, whereas teams trained live in pairs. Both groups underwent 5 iVR training sessions over 6 weeks. Subsequently, they completed a real-life assessment in which they performed anterior approach total hip arthroplasty surgery on a high-fidelity model with real equipment in a simulated OR. Teams performed together, and individually trained participants were randomly paired up. Videos were marked by 2 blinded assessors recording the 'Non-Operative Technical Skills for Surgeons, Oxford NOn-TECHnical Skills II and Scrub Practitioners' List of Intraoperative Non-Technical Skills' scores. Secondary outcomes were procedure duration and the number of technical errors.

Results: Teams outperformed individually trained participants for nontechnical skills in the real-world assessment (Non-Operative Technical Skills for Surgeons: 13.1±1.5 vs 10.6±1.6, P = 0.002, Non-TECHnical Skills II score: 51.7 ± 5.5 vs 42.3 ± 5.6, P = 0.001 and Scrub Practitioners' List of Intraoperative Non-Technical Skills: 10 ± 1.2 vs 7.9 ± 1.6, P = 0.004). They completed the assessment 33% faster (28.2 minutes ± 5.5 vs 41.8 ± 8.9, P < 0.001), and made fewer than half the number of technical errors (10.4 ± 6.1 vs 22.6 ± 5.4, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Multiplayer training leads to faster surgery with fewer technical errors and the development of superior nontechnical skills.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

T.C.E. declares research funding from Johnson and Johnson, A.D.L. declares research funding from the Royal College of Surgeons of England, J.P.C. declares research funding and paid consultancy from Johnson and Johnson, Zimmer Biomet and JRI, he declares shares/stock in Embody Orthopedic. K.L. declares research funding from Johnson and Johnson, and the Royal College of Surgeons Royal College of Surgeons of England. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
The equipment set up for the multiplayer mode. The images in the top right and left demonstrate the view through the headsets for the surgeon (right) and scrub technician (left). The image below shows the hardware (headset and motion-tracked controllers) being used in a team training session.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
The setup for the real-world assessment using the distributed simulation. A, Demonstrates the overall setup with equipment, personnel, and model. B, Shows a participant broaching the femur during the simulated operation.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Column scatter plots demonstrating the nontechnical performance in the real-world assessment for the 3 measured scores: (A) NOTSS (B) NOTECHS-II, and (C) SPLINTS, for team (T) and solo (S) trained participants. The central horizontal line within the box shows the mean. The whiskers demonstrate the SD. Significant P values (<0.05) are indicated.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Column scatter plots demonstrating the technical performance metrics in the real-world assessment: (A) technical error count and (B) procedure duration in minutes, for team (T) and solo (S) trained participants. The central horizontal line within the box shows the mean. The whiskers demonstrate the SD. Significant P values (<0.05) are indicated.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. de Vries EN, Ramrattan MA, Smorenburg SM, et al. The incidence and nature of in-hospital adverse events: a systematic review. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008;17:216–223. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sari AB, Sheldon TA, Cracknell A, et al. Sensitivity of routine system for reporting patient safety incidents in an NHS hospital: retrospective patient case note review. BMJ. 2007;334:79. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vincent C, Neale G, Woloshynowych M. Adverse events in British hospitals: preliminary retrospective record review. BMJ. 2001;322:517–519. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Leape LL, Brennan TA, Laird N, et al. The nature of adverse events in hospitalized patients. Results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study II. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:377–384. - PubMed
    1. Tang B, Hanna GB, Joice P, et al. Identification and categorization of technical errors by Observational Clinical Human Reliability Assessment (OCHRA) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Arch Surg. 2004;139:1215–1220. - PubMed

Publication types