Cost-effectiveness of virtual reality and wet laboratory cataract surgery simulation.

Abstract

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of phacoemulsification simulation training in virtual reality simulator and wet laboratory on operating theater performance. Residents were randomized to a combination of virtual reality and wet laboratory phacoemulsification or wet laboratory phacoemulsification. A reference control group consisted of trainees who had wet laboratory training without phacoemulsification. All trainees were assessed on operating theater performance in 3 sequential cataract patients. International Council of Ophthalmology Surgical Competency Assessment Rubric-phacoemulsification (ICO OSCAR phaco) scores by 2 masked independent graders and cost data were used to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A decision model was constructed to indicate the most cost-effective simulation training strategy based on the willingness to pay (WTP) per ICO OSCAR phaco score gained. Twenty-two trainees who performed phacoemulsification in 66 patients were analyzed. Trainees who had additional virtual reality simulation achieved higher mean ICO OSCAR phaco scores compared with trainees who had wet laboratory phacoemulsification and control (49.5 ± standard deviation [SD] 9.8 vs 39.0 ± 15.8 vs 32.5 ± 12.1, P < .001). Compared with the control group, ICER per ICO OSCAR phaco of wet laboratory phacoemulsification was $13,473 for capital cost and $2209 for recurring cost. Compared with wet laboratory phacoemulsification, ICER per ICO OSCAR phaco of additional virtual reality simulator training was US $23,778 for capital cost and $1879 for recurring cost. The threshold WTP values per ICO OSCAR phaco score for combined virtual reality simulator and wet laboratory phacoemulsification to be most cost-effective was $22,500 for capital cost and $1850 for recurring cost. Combining virtual reality simulator with wet laboratory phacoemulsification training is effective for skills transfer in the operating theater. Despite of the high capital cost of virtual reality simulator, its relatively low recurring cost is more favorable toward cost-effectiveness.