Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39633499›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2024

Acceptance and use of extended reality in surgical training: an umbrella review.

Esmaeel Toni, Elham Toni, Mahsa Fereidooni, Haleh Ayatollahi

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Simulation-based learning in orthopaedics:Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
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

4 authors.

Esmaeel ToniMedical Informatics, Student Research Committee, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Elham ToniHealth Information Technology, Department of Health Information Sciences, Faculty of Management and Medical Information Sciences, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
Mahsa FereidooniMedical Informatics, Department of Health Information Technology, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran.
Haleh AyatollahiMedical Informatics, Health Management and Economics Research Center, Health Management Research Institute, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. ayatollahi.h@iums.ac.ir.ORCID 0000-0003-3974-3648

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExtended reality (XR) technologies which include virtual, augmented, and mixed reality have significant potential in surgical training, because they can help to eliminate the limitations of traditional methods. This umbrella review aimed to investigate factors that influence the acceptance and use of XR in surgical training using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model.

methodsAn umbrella review was conducted in 2024 by searching various databases until the end of 2023. Studies were selected based on the predefined eligibility criteria and analyzed using the components of the UTAUT model. The quality and risk of bias of the selected studies were assessed, and the findings were reported descriptively.

resultsA total of 44 articles were included in this study. In most studies, XR technologies were used for surgical training of orthopedics, neurology, and laparoscopy. Based on the UTAUT model, the findings indicated that XR technologies improved surgical skills and procedural accuracy while simultaneously reducing risks and operating room time (performance expectancy). In terms of effort expectancy, user-friendly systems were accessible for the trainees with various levels of expertise. From a social influence standpoint, XR technologies enhanced learning by providing positive feedback from experienced surgeons during surgical training. In addition, facilitating conditions emphasized the importance of resource availability and addressing technical and financial limitations to maximize the effectiveness of XR technologies in surgical training.

conclusionsXR technologies significantly improve surgical training by increasing skills and procedural accuracy. Although adoption is facilitated by designing user-friendly interfaces and positive social influences, financial and resource challenges must be overcome, too. The successful integration of XR into surgical training necessitates careful curriculum design and resource allocation. Future research should focus on overcoming these barriers, so that XR can fully realize its potential in surgical training.

Indexed as

Augmented RealityClinical CompetenceGeneral SurgeryVirtual RealityHumansLaparoscopyAugmented realtyExtended realityMixed realitySurgical trainingUmbrella reviewVirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID39633499
PMCPMC11616384

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.