Clinical trial NCT06552195: Augmented Reality in Learning Anatomy: The TEACHANATOMY Randomized Cross-over Trial
Official title: Hologram-Based Augmented Reality in Learning Anatomy: The TEACHANATOMY Randomized Cross-over Trial
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Phase: NA
Conditions: Augmented Reality
Anatomy Education
Keywords: Anatomy teaching
Augmented reality
Magic leap
Lead sponsor: Balgrist University Hospital
Sponsor class: OTHER
Collaborators: name: ETH Zurich
First posted: 2024-08-13
Enrollment: 300
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Maximum age (years): 25
Standard ages: ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: yes
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: CROSSOVER
Primary purpose: OTHER

Brief summary: Cadaver use in anatomy education is undergoing several limitations in many universities, due to high costs, time constraints and supply difficulties. As alternatives to cadaver dissections, new teaching methods based on visual technologies, such as augmented reality (AR), are being implemented worldwide.

Augmented reality (AR), based on virtual interactive 3-dimensional elements (holograms) overlaid in the real-world, represents a promising alternative to explore the human body. In this study, we will test the efficacy of AR as an alternative teaching method in anatomy education by comparing traditional learning methods based on 2-dimensional (2D) images, videos, and online learning programs with the novel AR learning module The primary endpoint will consist of the score in the final theoretical and practical knowledge tests, assessed at two timepoints: immediately after the study session and after 3 months.

Secondary endpoints will include adverse health symptoms and user experience, assessed immediately after the study session.

Detailed description: Cadaver use in anatomy education is undergoing several limitations in many universities, due to high costs, time constraints and supply difficulties. As alternatives to cadaver dissections, new teaching methods based on visual technologies, such as augmented reality (AR), are being implemented worldwide.

Augmented reality (AR), based on virtual interactive 3-dimensional elements (holograms) overlaid in the real-world, represents a promising alternative to explore the human body. In this study, we will test the efficacy of AR as an alternative teaching method in anatomy education. Our hypothesis is that learning with AR is more efficient than traditional learning methods.

Preparation: We will prepare 2 fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens to allow visualization of anatomical structure of the shoulder and hips. The cadavers will be obtained from a human body donated for university teaching activities. Using a digital single-lens reflex camera, we will acquire several images. These images will be then converted into a 3D model by the ROCS team at Balgrist University Hospital and optimized for use with the Magic Leap AR headset.

Procedure: Participants (approx. 300) will be randomly assigned to the AR or the traditional learning (TL) group. Each participant will learn one anatomy module with traditional learning methods, which will include books, access to websites, 3D videos, and online learning programs, and one module with the AR-based learning program. The two modules will be administered approximately 3 weeks apart.

Group A: Shoulder anatomy with traditional learning methods and hips anatomy with AR based 3D program.

Group B: Shoulder anatomy with AR based 3D program and hips anatomy with traditional learning methods.

The primary endpoint will consist of the score in the final theoretical and practical anatomy tests, assessed at two timepoints: immediately after the study session and after 3 months.

Secondary endpoints include adverse health symptoms, assessed with a Likert scale survey, and user experience, evaluated using an adapted NASA Task Load Index scale plus additional questions.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* Medical students attending the 1st or 2nd year of undergraduate medical education
* Must not have prior anatomical education

Exclusion Criteria:

* Epilepsy
* Binocular vision disorder such as strabismus
* Current head and/or neck injuries
* Inflammation of the scalp and/or eye
* Amputations or partial amputations of the hands

Primary outcomes:
measure: knowledge test
timeFrame: immediately after the study session, day 1, and after three months
Secondary outcomes:
measure: adverse health symptoms
timeFrame: Immediately after the knowledge test, Day 1
measure: User experience
timeFrame: Immediately after the Adverse health symptoms, Day 1
Other outcomes:
Locations:
Study officials:
affiliation: Balgrust University Hospital
name: Lukas Zingg, MD
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References:
citation: Stromberga Z, Phelps C, Smith J, Moro C. Teaching with Disruptive Technology: The Use of Augmented, Virtual, and Mixed Reality (HoloLens) for Disease Education. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2021;1317:147-162. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-61125-5_8.
citation: Bolek KA, De Jong G, Henssen D. The effectiveness of the use of augmented reality in anatomy education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2021 Jul 27;11(1):15292. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-94721-4.
citation: Chytas D, Johnson EO, Piagkou M, Mazarakis A, Babis GC, Chronopoulos E, Nikolaou VS, Lazaridis N, Natsis K. The role of augmented reality in Anatomical education: An overview. Ann Anat. 2020 May;229:151463. doi: 10.1016/j.aanat.2020.151463. Epub 2020 Jan 21.
citation: Curran VR, Xu X, Aydin MY, Meruvia-Pastor O. Use of Extended Reality in Medical Education: An Integrative Review. Med Sci Educ. 2022 Dec 19;33(1):275-286. doi: 10.1007/s40670-022-01698-4. eCollection 2023 Feb.
citation: Gsaxner C, Li J, Pepe A, Jin Y, Kleesiek J, Schmalstieg D, Egger J. The HoloLens in medicine: A systematic review and taxonomy. Med Image Anal. 2023 Apr;85:102757. doi: 10.1016/j.media.2023.102757. Epub 2023 Jan 21.
citation: McBain KA, Habib R, Laggis G, Quaiattini A, M Ventura N, Noel GPJC. Scoping review: The use of augmented reality in clinical anatomical education and its assessment tools. Anat Sci Educ. 2022 Jul;15(4):765-796. doi: 10.1002/ase.2155. Epub 2022 Jan 19.
citation: Moro C, Birt J, Stromberga Z, Phelps C, Clark J, Glasziou P, Scott AM. Virtual and Augmented Reality Enhancements to Medical and Science Student Physiology and Anatomy Test Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Anat Sci Educ. 2021 May;14(3):368-376. doi: 10.1002/ase.2049. Epub 2021 Feb 26.
citation: Navab N, Martin-Gomez A, Seibold M, Sommersperger M, Song T, Winkler A, Yu K, Eck U. Medical Augmented Reality: Definition, Principle Components, Domain Modeling, and Design-Development-Validation Process. J Imaging. 2022 Dec 23;9(1):4. doi: 10.3390/jimaging9010004.
citation: Stojanovska M, Tingle G, Tan L, Ulrey L, Simonson-Shick S, Mlakar J, Eastman H, Gotschall R, Boscia A, Enterline R, Henninger E, Herrmann KA, Simpson SW, Griswold MA, Wish-Baratz S. Mixed Reality Anatomy Using Microsoft HoloLens and Cadaveric Dissection: A Comparative Effectiveness Study. Med Sci Educ. 2019 Nov 15;30(1):173-178. doi: 10.1007/s40670-019-00834-x. eCollection 2020 Mar.
citation: Uruthiralingam U, Rea PM. Augmented and Virtual Reality in Anatomical Education - A Systematic Review. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2020;1235:89-101. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-37639-0_5.
citation: Moro C, Stromberga Z, Raikos A, Stirling A. The effectiveness of virtual and augmented reality in health sciences and medical anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 2017 Nov;10(6):549-559. doi: 10.1002/ase.1696. Epub 2017 Apr 17.