Exploring Virtual Reality (VR) as an Anatomy Teaching Supplement

Abstract

INTRODUCTIONStanford’s Division of Clinical Anatomy offered a virtual, week‐long Clinical Anatomy Summer Program (CASP) to pre‐health students interested in learning clinical anatomy, enabling the exploration of Virtual Reality (VR) as a supplemental teaching and learning modality. Students attended lectures, clinical case presentations, and hour‐long VR lab demonstrations featuring anatomical models via Engage platform. Students were provided support with setup, operation, and troubleshooting of Oculus Quest 1 headsets and the Engage application. The goal of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of VR in anatomy teaching, understand the impact VR may have on the overall quality of the learning experience, and assess potential drawbacks to the usage of VR technology as a teaching tool.METHODSData was collected from anonymous survey responses of CASP 2020 students via Qualtrics. VR specific questions asked the students to rate various aspects of their VR experience using the 7‐point Likert scale with answers ranging from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree.” A series of short answer questions were also asked to obtain further insight on the overall VR experience.RESULTSThe CASP 2020 survey yielded a response rate of 68.75% (n=44). A Chi‐Square Goodness of Fit Test, X2(6, n=44) = 9.76, p=.045, confirmed expectations that the majority of respondents would agree that VR was an overall positive experience. 57% of students strongly agreed that VR was a positive learning experience. 62% of students found VR to overall be somewhat good, with 34% of respondents specifically mentioning they liked the 3D spatial visualization benefit of VR. Some students experienced negative symptoms upon use of the technology, with 20% reporting nausea, motion sickness, and/or headache. 46% chose VR as the element of the program that contributed least to their learning, with other programmatic elements garnering more favor, like surgical demonstration videos and hands‐on activities.CONCLUSIONSThe majority of CASP 2020 respondents had a positive experience with VR and recognized its benefits as a virtual learning modality, with specific mention of the ability to spatially visualize and interact with VR anatomical models. Our survey results show that VR may not contribute any more understanding of the material than traditional resources such as lectures and live demonstrations. The first iteration of this VR technology in CASP highlighted the need for improvements related to connectivity, audio, graphics, and setup instructions. Major improvements to VR were made for CASP 2021, and we expect to see this reflected in the CASP 2021 survey results.SIGNIFICANCEVR technology has strong potential as a supplemental teaching and learning tool in anatomy education. Immersion in the VR space lends itself well to the spatial visualization of anatomical structures because models can be manipulated to become larger than life, rotated to any angle, and peered into to show internal structures. Further evaluation of VR technology in anatomy education will illuminate the improvements necessary for implementation in higher education and its effectiveness in improving students’ ability to identify structures on cadaveric specimens.