Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33327963›Full record

Trial reportBMC medical education2020

Mixed reality for teaching catheter placement to medical students: a randomized single-blinded, prospective trial.

D S Schoeb, J Schwarz, S Hein, D Schlager, P F Pohlmann, A Frankenschmidt, C Gratzke, A Miernik

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC medical education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

D S SchoebDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany. dominik.stefan.schoeb@uniklinik-freiburg.de.
J SchwarzDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
S HeinDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
D SchlagerDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
P F PohlmannDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
A FrankenschmidtDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
C GratzkeDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
A MiernikDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
University Medical Center Freiburg · DEUniversity of Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCost-effective methods to facilitate practical medical education are in high demand and the "mixed-reality" (MR) technology seems suitable to provide students with instructions when learning a new practical task. To evaluate a step-by-step mixed reality (MR) guidance system for instructing a practical medical procedure, we conducted a randomized, single-blinded prospective trial on medical students learning bladder catheter placement.

methodsWe enrolled 164 medical students. Students were randomized into 2 groups and received instructions on how to perform bladder catheter placement on a male catheterization training model. One group (107 students) were given their instructions by an instructor, while the other group (57 students) were instructed via an MR guidance system using a Microsoft HoloLens. Both groups did hands on training. A standardized questionnaire covering previous knowledge, interest in modern technologies and a self-evaluation was filled out. In addition, students were asked to evaluate the system's usability. We assessed both groups's learning outcome via a standardized OSCE (objective structured clinical examination).

resultsOur evaluation of the learning outcome revealed an average point value of 19.96 ± 2,42 for the control group and 21.49 ± 2.27 for the MR group - the MR group's result was significantly better (p = 0.00). The self-evaluations revealed no difference between groups, however, the control group gave higher ratings when evaluating the quality of instructions. The MR system's assessment showed less usability, with a cumulative SUS (system usability scale) score of 56.6 (lower half) as well as a cumulative score of 24.2 ± 7.3 (n = 52) out of 100 in the NASA task load index.

conclusionsMR is a promising tool for instructing practical skills, and has the potential to enable superior learning outcomes. Advances in MR technology are necessary to improve the usability of current systems.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trial Register ID: DRKS00013186.

Indexed as

Augmented RealityUrinary CatheterizationVirtual RealityAdultClinical CompetenceComputer-Assisted InstructionDiagnostic Self EvaluationEducational MeasurementEducation, Medical, GraduateFemaleHumansMaleProspective StudiesSingle-Blind MethodYoung AdultEducation, medicalSimulation trainingUrinary cathetersUrologic surgical procedures

Identifiers

PMID33327963
PMCPMC7745503
OpenAlexW3113245459

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.