Virtual Reality, Autostereoscopy, and Physical Models for Learning Anatomy: Performance Comparisons

Introduction Traditional anatomical education relies on textbooks, physical models, and cadaveric specimens. Advances in technology have provided other display modalities including virtual reality (VR), and autostereoscopic displays. VR uses head‐mounted displays (HMDs) for an interactive experience and autostereoscopic screens, like Alioscopy TM , offer a stereoscopic but HMD‐free environment. Current research shows contradictory results on the efficacy of VR compared to physical models, and there appears to be no data on the efficacy of autostereoscopic displays in learning anatomy. The purpose of this study is to determine whether VR, Alioscopy TM , or physical models yield the best performance for anatomical education. Methods Students at McMaster University without prior anatomy training will learn nominal skeletal anatomy in three different modalities: VR (Oculus Quest 2 TM ), Alioscopy TM , or a physical 3D‐printed bone model. Each of the environments will be as identical as possible (i.e, the VR environment is a rendering of the exact room and set‐up used for testing the physical bone models). Participants will be randomized to one of three interventions where they will study ten bony landmarks on either the human hemipelvis, zygomatic bone, or calcaneus in a distinct modality. Participants will be seated and use an Xbox TM controller to rotate the bone along the vertical axis of rotation. After four minutes, an untimed, recognition‐based test will be administered, where participants will be given a 3D‐printed bone identical to the one used in the learning phase, with randomized landmarks and word bank of landmarks learnt. Performance will be evaluated based on landmarks correctly identified on the recognition‐based test. Results Based on the current literature, we hypothesize that the physical models will be a superior learning environment compared to the VR environment. However, significant improvements in the HMD of the Oculus Quest 2 may have ameliorated previous issues with the VR environment. There is no data available on the efficacy of Alioscopy TM and while the absence of an HMD is appealing, its narrow viewing angle compared to the immersive VR environment may be problematic. Conclusion With the push to increase accessibility and decrease costs associated with anatomical education with the help of digital modalities, the findings from this study are critical to informing teaching practices, and technology use in anatomy education.

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.