Effect of Immersive Virtual Reality Teamwork Training on Safety Behaviors During Surgical Cases: Nonrandomized Intervention Versus Controlled Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Approximately 4000 preventable surgical errors occur per year in the US operating rooms, many due to suboptimal teamwork and safety behaviors. Such errors can result in temporary or permanent harm to patients, including physical injury, emotional distress, or even death, and can also adversely affect care providers, often referred to as the "second victim." Objective: Given the persistence of adverse events in the operating rooms, the objective of this study was to quantify the effect of an innovative and immersive virtual reality (VR)-based educational intervention on (1) safety behaviors of surgeons in the operating rooms and (2) sense-making regarding the overall training experience. Methods: This mixed methods pre- versus postintervention pilot study was conducted in a large academic medical center with 55 operating rooms. Safety behaviors were observed and quantified using validated Teamwork Evaluation of Non-Technical Skills instrument during surgical cases at baseline (101 observations; 83 surgeons) and postimmersive VR based intervention (postintervention: 24 observations within each group; intervention group [with VR training; 10 surgeons] and control [no VR training; 10 surgeons]). VR intervention included a 45-minute immersive VR-based training incorporating a pre- and postdebriefing based on Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety (TeamSTEPPS) principles to improve safety behaviors. A 2-tailed, 2-sample t-test with adjustments for multiplicity of the tests was used to test for significance in observable safety behaviors between the groupings. The debriefing data underwent analysis through the phenomenological analysis method to gain insights into how participants interpreted the training. Results: Preintervention, all safety behaviors averaged slightly above "acceptable" scores, with an overall average of 2.2 (range 2-2.3; 0-3 scale). The 10 surgeons that underwent our intervention showed statistically significant (P<.05) improvements in 90% (18/20) of safety behaviors when compared to the 10 surgeons that did not receive the intervention (overall average 2.5, range 2.3-2.7 vs overall average 2.1, range 1.9-2.2). Our qualitative analysis based on 492 quotes from participants suggests that the observed behavioral changes are a result of an immersive experience and sense-making of key TeamSTEPPS training concepts. Conclusions: VR-based immersive training intervention focused on TeamSTEPPS principles seems effective in improving safety behaviors in the operating rooms as quantified via observations using the Teamwork Evaluation of Non-Technical Skills instrument. Further research with larger, more diverse sample sizes is needed to confirm the generalizability of these findings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".