Scholarlink

Background <p>Simulation-based medical education (SMBE) is a well-established and effective method for clinical training, yet its implementation is often resource-intensive and logistically demanding. Virtual reality (VR) has emerged as a promising educational tool, offering immersive, multisensory simulations that may support both procedural and cognitive skill development. In educational context where students must prepare for complex scenarios, VR may serve as a preparatory educational tool. Thus, exploring such simulation formats is well justified to enhance training outcomes.</p> Aim <p>To explore medical students’ experiences of using VR as preparation for a subsequent non-VR trauma simulation.</p> Methods <p>Thirty-two medical students in their seventh semester who were assigned to use a VR application prior to a scheduled non-VR trauma simulation, participated in this study. Eight focus-group interviews were conducted immediately after the trauma simulation. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis.</p> Results <p>The findings were categorised into four categories: <i>Perceived educational effect</i>, <i>Practical user experience</i>, <i>Comparison of VR and other educational forms</i>, and <i>Areas for improvement in the VR application</i>. The students described the VR application as an engaging and motivating learning method that supported autonomous preparation. However, the VR application was not perceived as sufficient to replace traditional educational formats. Key limitations included low interactivity, limited realism, and lack of cognitive flexibility. The participants proposed improvements, such as dynamic patient responses, expanded roles, and increased complexity in order to better reflect clinical practice.</p> Conclusions <p>The VR application shows potential as a flexible and accessible preparatory complement to SMBE. However, in its current form, it was not perceived as a suitable standalone learning method. The identified limitations relate to the design and scope of the specific VR application studied rather than to inherent limitations of VR technology. Student perspectives offer important insights into how preparatory VR may support motivation, early cognitive rehearsal and familiarization with simulation workflows, and should be actively considered in the development of VR-based educational tools.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Virtual Reality as a Preparatory Educational Tool in Non-VR Trauma Simulation for Medical Students: A Qualitative Content Analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月17日

查看全文
  • L. Gyllencreutz,
  • M. Byström,
  • K. Jonsson,
  • M M. Haapamäki

摘要

Background

Simulation-based medical education (SMBE) is a well-established and effective method for clinical training, yet its implementation is often resource-intensive and logistically demanding. Virtual reality (VR) has emerged as a promising educational tool, offering immersive, multisensory simulations that may support both procedural and cognitive skill development. In educational context where students must prepare for complex scenarios, VR may serve as a preparatory educational tool. Thus, exploring such simulation formats is well justified to enhance training outcomes.

Aim

To explore medical students’ experiences of using VR as preparation for a subsequent non-VR trauma simulation.

Methods

Thirty-two medical students in their seventh semester who were assigned to use a VR application prior to a scheduled non-VR trauma simulation, participated in this study. Eight focus-group interviews were conducted immediately after the trauma simulation. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

Results

The findings were categorised into four categories: Perceived educational effect, Practical user experience, Comparison of VR and other educational forms, and Areas for improvement in the VR application. The students described the VR application as an engaging and motivating learning method that supported autonomous preparation. However, the VR application was not perceived as sufficient to replace traditional educational formats. Key limitations included low interactivity, limited realism, and lack of cognitive flexibility. The participants proposed improvements, such as dynamic patient responses, expanded roles, and increased complexity in order to better reflect clinical practice.

Conclusions

The VR application shows potential as a flexible and accessible preparatory complement to SMBE. However, in its current form, it was not perceived as a suitable standalone learning method. The identified limitations relate to the design and scope of the specific VR application studied rather than to inherent limitations of VR technology. Student perspectives offer important insights into how preparatory VR may support motivation, early cognitive rehearsal and familiarization with simulation workflows, and should be actively considered in the development of VR-based educational tools.