MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153254302 · doi:10.1016/j.xnsj.2021.100063

Virtual reality as a learning tool in spinal anatomy and surgical techniques

2021· article· en· W3153254302 on OpenAlexafffund
T Chen, Y Zhang, Chen Ding, Kan Ting, Seong Min Yoon, H Sahak, Andrew Hope, Stewart McLachlin, Eric Crawford, Michael Hardisty, Jérémie Larouche, Joel Finkelstein

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Spine Society Journal (NASSJ) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsHeadsetMedicineMedical physicsDecompressionVirtual realityNeurosurgeryTest (biology)Lumbar spinal stenosisPhysical therapyMedical educationRadiologySurgeryComputer scienceHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BackgroundSurgical simulation is a valuable educational tool for trainees to practice in a safe, standardized, and controlled environment. Interactive feedback-based virtual reality (VR) has recently moved to the forefront of spine surgery training, with most commercial products focusing on instrumentation. There is a paucity of learning tools directed at decompression principles. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of VR simulation and its educational role in learning spinal anatomy and decompressive techniques.MethodsA VR simulation module was created with custom-developed software. Orthopaedic and neurosurgical trainees were prospectively enrolled and interacted with patient-specific 3D models of lumbar spinal stenosis while wearing a headset. A surgical toolkit allowed users to perform surgical decompression, specifically removing soft tissues and bone. The module allowed users to perform various techniques in posterior decompressions and comprehend anatomic areas of stenosis. Pre- and post-module testing, and utility questionnaires were administered to provide both quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the module as a learning device.Results28 trainees were enrolled (20-orthopaedic, 8-neurosurgery) in the study. Pre-test scores on anatomic knowledge progressively improved and showed strong positive correlation with year-in-training (Pearson's r = 0.79). Following simulation, the average improvement in post-test scores was 11.4% in junior trainees (PGYI-III), and 1.0% in senior trainees (PGYIII-Fellows). Knowledge improvement approached statistical significance amongst junior trainees (p = 0.0542). 89% of participants found the VR module useful in understanding and learning the pathology of spinal stenosis. 71% found it useful in comprehending decompressive techniques. 96% believed it had utility in preoperative planning with patient-specific models.ConclusionsOur original VR spinal decompression simulation has shown to be overwhelmingly positively received amongst trainees as both a learning module of patho-anatomy and patient-specific preoperative planning, with particular benefit for junior trainees.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Spine Society Journal (NASSJ)Same topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207