Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Screen-Based Simulation, Virtual Reality, and Haptic Simulators

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Comprehensive Healthcare Simulation: Pediatrics

Part of the book series: Comprehensive Healthcare Simulation ((CHS))

Abstract

Screen-based simulations (SBSs) use available digital technology to represent patients, populations, or other healthcare encounters on a computer screen or a mobile tablet, smartphone, or other screen-based device. These include uses of virtual patients, virtual worlds, screen-based haptic trainers, and resource management simulators. Simulations using screens have advantages over mannequin-based simulations—the software is infinitely replicable, the simulation programs can be portable, they can be accessed asynchronously without a live instructor present, the software can be distributed to many devices, and the programming can track massive amounts of usage data. The screen, however, is the key disadvantage—for healthcare tasks that do not normally use a screen, SBSs lack functional fidelity. Additionally, upfront costs in programming and development can be prohibitive—both financially and in terms of time and labor. Examples of types of SBS that currently exist in pediatric health care, general health care, and non-health care applications are provided, as well as consideration in developing SBS as part of the pediatric simulation education repertoire.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ilgen J, Sherbino J, Cook DA. Technology-enhanced simulation in emergency medicine: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Emerg Med. 2013;20:117–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Graafland M, Schraagen JM, Schijven MP. Systematic review of serious games for medical education and surgical skills training. Br J Surg. 2012;99:1322–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kolb D. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Feinberg R, Swygert KA, Haist SA, Dillon GF, Murray CT. The impact of postgraduate training on USMLE® Step 3® and its computer-based case simulation component. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;27(1):65–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Fall LH, Berman NB, Smith S, White CB, Woodhead JC, Olson AL. Multi-institutional development and utilization of a computer-assisted learning program for the pediatrics clerkship: the CLIPP Project. Acad Med. 2005;80(9):847–55. Epub 2005/08/27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pusic M, Andrews JS, Kessler DO, Teng DG, Pecaric MR, Ruzal-Shapiro C, Boutis K. Prevalence of abnormal cases in an image bank affects the learning of radiograph interpretation. Med Educ. 2012;46:289–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cook D, Erwin PJ, Triola MM. Computerized virtual patients in health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Med. 2010;85(10):1589–602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cook DA, Mark TM. Virtual patients: a critical literature review and proposed next steps. Med Educ. 2009;43(4):303–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schwaab J, Kman N, Nagel R, Bahner D, Martin DR, Khandelwal S, Vozenilek J, Danforth DR, Nelson R. Using second life virtual simulation environment for mock oral emergency medicine examination. Acad Emerg Med. 2011;18:559–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wiecha J HR, Sternthal E, Merialdi M. Learning in a virtual world: experience with using second life for medical education. J Med Internet Res. 2010;12(1):e1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Yao R, Heath T, Davies A, Forsyth T, Mitchell N, Hoberman P. Oculus VR Best Practices Guide. 2014. http://mediagoblin.tami.org.il/mgoblin_media/media_entries/657/OculusBestPractices.pdf. Accessed 30 Aug 2014.

  12. Bodenheimer T. The future of primary care: transforming practice. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(20):2086, 9. Epub 2008/11/14.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cheng A, Auerbach M, Hunt EA, Chang TP, Pusic M, Nadkarni V, Kessler D. Designing and conducting simulation-based research. Pediatrics. 2014;133(6):1091–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ellaway RH, Pusic M, Yavner S, Kalet AL. Context matters: emergent variability in an effectiveness trial of online teaching modules. Med Educ. 2014;48(4):386–96. Epub 2014/03/13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Brydges R, Dubrowski A, Regehr G. A new concept of unsupervised learning: directed self-guided learning in the health professions. Acad Med. 2010;85(10):S49–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Brydges R, Carnahan H, Safir O, Dubrowski A. How effective is self-guided learning of clinical technical skills? It’s all about process. Med Educ. 2009;43(5):507–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jorna PGAM. Heart rate and workload variations in actual and simulated flight. Ergonomics. 1993;36(9):1043–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tourassi G, Voisin S, Paguit V, Krupinski E. Investigating the link between radiologists’ gaze, diagnostic decision, and image content. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(6):1067–75. Epub 2013 Jun 20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Hamstra S, Brydges R, Hatala R, Zendejas B, Cook DA. Reconsidering fidelity in simulation-based training. Acad Med. 2014;89(3)387–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Norman G, Dore K, Grierson L. The minimal relationship between simulation fidelity and transfer of learning. Med Educ. 2012;46(7):636–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rudolph J, Simon R, Raemer DB. Which reality matters? Questions on the path to high engagement in healthcare simulation. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(3):161–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dieckmann P, Gaba D, Rall M. Deepening the theoretical foundations of patient simulation as social practice. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(3):183–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Maran N, Glavin RJ. Low- to high-fidelity simulation—a continuum of medical education? Med Educ. 2003;37(Suppl 1):22–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Pezzulo G, Barsalou LW, Cangelosi A, Fischer MH, McRae K, Spivey MJ. Computational grounded cognition: a new alliance between grounded cognition and computational modeling. Front Psychol. 2013;3(612):1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fayez R FL, Kaneva P, Fried GM. Testing the construct validity of the Simbionix GI Mentor II virtual reality colonoscopy simulator metrics: module matters. Surg Endosc. 2010;24(5):1060–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bedwell WL, Pavlas D, Heyne K, Lazzara EH, Salas E. Toward a taxonomy linking game attributes to learning: an empirical study. Simul Gaming. 2012;43(6):729–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pataki C, Pato MT, Sugar J, Rizzo AS, Parsons TD, St George C, Kenny P. Virtual patients as novel teaching tools in psychiatry. Acad Psychiatry. 2012;36:398–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Williams K, Wryobeck J, Edinger W, McGrady A, Fors U, Zary N. Assessment of competencies by use of virtual patient technology. Acad Psychiatry. 2011;35(5):328–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Stevens A, Hernandez J, Johnsen K, Dickerson R, Raij A, Harrison C, DiPietro M, Allen B, Ferdig R, Foti S, Jackson J, Shin M, Cendan J, Watson R, Duerson M, Lok B, Cohen M, Wagner P, Lind DS. The use of virtual patients to teach medical students history taking and communication skills. Am J Surg. 2006;191(6):806–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Andreatta P, Maslowski E, Petty S, Shim W, Marsh M, Hall T, Stern S, Frankel J. Virtual reality triage training provides a viable solution for disaster-preparedness. Acad Emerg Med. 2010;17(8):870–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Youngblood P, Harter PM, Srivastava S, Moffett S, Heinrichs WL, Dev P. Design, development, and evaluation of an online virtual emergency department for training trauma teams. Simul Healthc. 2008;3(3):146–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wendling A, Halan S, Tighe P, Le L, Euliano T, Lok B. Virtual humans versus standardized patients: which lead residents to more correct diagnoses? Acad Med. 2011;86(3):384–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Amichai-Hamberger Y, Wainapel G, Fox S. “On the internet no one know i’m an introvert’: extroversion, neuroticism, and internet interaction. CyberPsychol Behav. 2002;5(2):125–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Alklind Taylor A-S, Backlund P, Niklasson L. The coaching cycle: a coaching-by-gaming approach in serious games. Simul Gaming. 2012;43(5):648–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Ferlitsch A, Schoefl R, Puespoek A, Miehsler W, Schoeniger-Hekele M, Hofer H, Gangl A, Homoncik M. Effect of virtual endoscopy simulator training on performance of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients: a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy. 2010;42(12):1049–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Blum M, Powers TW, Sundaresan S. Bronchoscopy simulator effectively prepares junior residents to competently perform basic clinical bronchoscopy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;78(1):287–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Koch AD HJ, Schoon EJ, de Man RA, Kuipers EJ. A second-generation virtual reality simulator for colonoscopy: validation and initial experience. Endoscopy. 2008;40(9):735–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Davoudi M, Osann K, Colt HG. Validation of two instruments to assess technical bronchoscopic skill using virtual reality simulation. Respiration. 2008;76:92–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Andreatta P, Woodrum DT, Birkmeyer JD, Yellamanchilli RK, Doherty GM, Gauger PG, Minter RM et al. Laparoscopic skills are improved with LapMentor training: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg. 2006;243(6):854–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Tanoue K IS, Konishi K, Yasunaga T, Okazaki K, Yamaguchi S, Yoshida D, Kakeji Y, Hashizume M. Effectiveness of endoscopic surgery training for medical students using a virtual reality simulator versus a box trainer: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc. 2008;22(4):985–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Hodge T, Deakin JM. Deliberate practice and expertise in the martial arts: the role of context in motor recall. 1998;20(3):260–79.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Lehmann A, Ericsson KA. Research on expert performance and deliberate practice: implications for the education of amateur musicians and music students. Psychomusicology. 1997;16(1–2):40–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kessler D, Auerbach M, Pusic M, Tunik MG, Foltin JC. A randomized trial of simulation-based deliberate practice for infant lumbar puncture skills. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(4):197–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Wayne D, Barsuk JH, O’Leary KJ, Fudala MJ, McGaghie WC. Mastery learning of thoracentesis skills by internal medicine residents using simulation technology and deliberate practice. J Hosp Med. 2008;3(1):48–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Ericsson K. Deliberate practice and acquisition of expert performance: a general overview. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15(11):988–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Ericsson K. Deliberate practice and the acquisition and maintenance of expert performance in medicine and related domains. Acad Med. 2004;79(Suppl 10 ):S70–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Garris R, Ahlers R, Driskell JE. Games, motivation, and learning: a research and practice model. Simul Gaming. 2002;43(1):118–32.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Cohen J, Cohen SA, Vora KC, Xue X, Burdick JS, Bank S, et al. Multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of virtual-reality simulator training in acquisition of competency in colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64(3):361–8. Epub 2006/08/23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Luciano C, Banerjee PP, Sorenson JM, FOley KT, Ansari SA, Rizzi S, Germanwala AV, Kranzler L, Chittiboina P, Roitberg BZ. Percutaneous spinal fixation simulation with virtual reality and haptics. Neurosurgery. 2013;72(Suppl 1):89–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Posel N, Fleiszer D, Shore BM. 12 tips: guidelines for authoring virtual patient cases. Med Teach. 2009;31:701–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. McGee J. Designing, developing and implementing branched-narrative virtual patients for medical education, training and assessment: a guide for authors of virtual patients. http://vpsim.pitt.edu/shell/documents/Virtual_Patient_Authoring_Best_Practices.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2014 [16p].

  52. Triola M, Campion N, McGee JB, Albright S, Greene P, Smothers V, Ellaway R. An XML standard for virtual patients: exchanging case-based simulations in medical education. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2007;2007:741–5.

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Medbiquitous Consortium Virtual Patient Implementors. (World Wide Web) 2013. http://www.medbiq.org/virtual_patient/implementers. Accessed 30 Aug 2014.

  54. Dabbagh N. Pedagogical models for E-Learning: a theory-based design framework. Int J Technol Teach Learn. 2005;1(1):25–44.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Moreno-Ger P, Torrente J, Hsieh YG, Lester WT. Usability testing for serious games: making informed design decisions with user data. Adv Hum-Computer Interact. 2012;2012:13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatrics, Division of Emergency Medicine & Transport, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Todd P. Chang MD, MAcM

  2. Department of Pediatrics, Division of Emergency Medicine, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, SSM Cardinal Glennon Children’s Medical Center, St. Louis, MO, USA

    James Gerard MD

  3. Department of Emergency Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA

    Martin V. Pusic MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Todd P. Chang MD, MAcM
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James Gerard MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martin V. Pusic MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Todd P. Chang MD, MAcM .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. KidSIM(TM) Pediatric Simulation Program, Alberta Children's Hospital, CALGARY, Alberta, Canada

    Vincent J. Grant

  2. KidSIM-ASPIRE Simulation Research Prgm, Alberta Children's Hospital, CALGARY, Alberta, Canada

    Adam Cheng

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chang, T., Gerard, J., Pusic, M. (2016). Screen-Based Simulation, Virtual Reality, and Haptic Simulators. In: Grant, V., Cheng, A. (eds) Comprehensive Healthcare Simulation: Pediatrics. Comprehensive Healthcare Simulation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24187-6_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24187-6_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-24185-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-24187-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation