Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30664469›Full record

ArticleJMIR human factors2019

Advancing Cardiac Surgery Case Planning and Case Review Conferences Using Virtual Reality in Medical Libraries: Evaluation of the Usability of Two Virtual Reality Apps.

Sandeep Napa, Michael Moore, Tania Bardyn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR human factors, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Assessing the impact of virtual reality on surgeons' mental models of complex congenital heart cases.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Virtual and Augmented Reality in Cardiac Surgery.Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sandeep NapaDepartment of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6462-4897
Michael MooreHealth Sciences Library, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6422-9988
Tania BardynHealth Sciences Library, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6062-3259
University of Washington · US

Funding

Transform Dissemination and Implementation Science in CTSA ProgramsUL1TR002319 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI John K. Amory · 2017 to 2026
$100.0M
NN/LM Region 6 RML Support Access to Biomedical and Health Information Core / University of WashingtonUG4LM012343 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BARDYN, TANIA P · 2016 to 2020
$10.5M
NLM NIH HHS UG4 LM012343
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCare providers and surgeons prepare for cardiac surgery using case conferences to review, discuss, and run through the surgical procedure. Surgeons visualize a patient's anatomy to decide the right surgical approach using magnetic resonance imaging and echocardiograms in a presurgical case planning session. Previous studies have shown that surgical errors can be reduced through the effective use of immersive virtual reality (VR) to visualize patient anatomy. However, inconsistent user interfaces, delegation of view control, and insufficient depth information cause user disorientation and interaction difficulties in using VR apps for case planning.

objectiveThe objective of the study was to evaluate and compare the usability of 2 commercially available VR apps-Bosc (Pyrus Medical systems) and Medical Holodeck (Nooon Web & IT GmbH)-using the Vive VR headset (HTC Corporation) to evaluate ease of use, physician attitudes toward VR technology, and viability for presurgical case planning. The role of medical libraries in advancing case planning is also explored.

methodsAfter screening a convenience sample of surgeons, fellows, and residents, ethnographic interviews were conducted to understand physician attitudes and experience with VR. Gaps in current case planning methods were also examined. We ran a usability study, employing a concurrent think-aloud protocol. To evaluate user satisfaction, we used the system usability scale (SUS) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX). A poststudy questionnaire was used to evaluate the VR experience and explore the role of medical libraries in advancing presurgical case planning. Semistructured interview data were analyzed using content analysis with feedback categorization.

resultsParticipants were residents, fellows, and surgeons from the University of Washington with a mean age of 41.5 (SD 11.67) years. A total of 8 surgeons participated in the usability study, 3 of whom had prior exposure to VR. Users found Medical Holodeck easier to use than Bosc. Mean adjusted NASA-TLX score for Medical Holodeck was 62.71 (SD 18.25) versus Bosc's 40.87 (SD 13.90). Neither app passed the mean SUS score of 68 for an app to be considered usable, though Medical Holodeck (66.25 [SD 12.87]) scored a higher mean SUS than Bosc (37.19 [SD 22.41]). One user rated the Bosc usable, whereas 3 users rated Medical Holodeck usable.

conclusionsInterviews highlighted the importance of precise anatomical conceptualization in presurgical case planning and teaching, identifying it as the top reason for modifying a surgical procedure. The importance of standardized user interaction features such as labeling is justified. The study also sheds light on the new roles medical librarians can play in curating VR content and promoting interdisciplinary collaboration.

Indexed as

cardiac surgerycase planningmedical librariesNASA-Task Load Indexpresurgical planningsystem usability scoreusability studyvirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID30664469
PMCPMC6352013
OpenAlexW2907429518

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.