Healthcare in a Virtual Environment: Workload and Simulation Sickness in a 3D CAVE
Much of patient care takes places in patients’ homes, but we do know very little about how patients deal with their health and chronic illness condition(s) while at home and how the physical environment can have an impact on their care. In this study, we focus on patients’ management of their personal health information management (PHIM) in the home.
To enable repeated assessment of a set of constant stimuli, we have scanned 20 different households that we subsequently rendered for viewing in a 3-D virtual cave (VR) CAVE. Study participants identified features in the virtual home models that they considered useful for PHIM.
Using the VR CAVE has many advantages. It enables all participants to experience the same stimulus in precisely the same condition, and it allows for standardization of the study procedures. However, we know relatively little about the impact the VR CAVE experience has on workload and simulation sickness, and if these interfere with task performance. In this study, we examine the relationship between time spent in the CAVE (duration), the number of frames rendered per second (framerate), the experienced workload and simulation sickness symptoms.
Results show that performing tasks in the CAVE required some effort, particularly mental workload. Only a few participants reported minor simulation sickness symptoms, such as dizziness, headache or eyestrain. Apart from a correlation between duration and workload, we did not find a significant relation between exposure, framerates, workload, and simulation sickness.
KeywordsVirtual reality Personal health information management
- 2.Werner NE, Carayon P, Casper GR, Hoonakker PLT, Arnott SC, Brennan PF (2016) Affordances of household features important for personal health information management: designing consumer health information technology for the home. In: Healthcare systems ergonomics and patient safety conference. IEA Press, pp 390–394Google Scholar
- 5.Stanney KM, Cohn JV (2009) Virtual environments. In: Sears A, Jacko J (eds) Human computer interaction: design issues, solutions, and applications. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
- 6.Naqvi SA, Badruddin N, Malik AS, Hazabbah W, Abdullah B (2013) Does 3D produce more symptoms of visually induced motion sickness? In: Proceedings of the 20th annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society, pp 6405–6408Google Scholar
- 8.Arthur K (1996) Effects of field of view on task performance with head-mounted displays. In: Conference companion on human factors in computing systems, Vancouver, British Columbia. ACM, pp 29–30Google Scholar
- 10.Bruck S, Watters PA Estimating cybersickness of simulated motion using the simulator sickness questionnaire (SSQ): a controlled study. In: 2009 sixth international conference on computer graphics, imaging and visualization, pp 486–488Google Scholar
- 14.Zielinski DJ, Rao HM, Sommer MA, Kopper R (2005) Exploring the effects of image persistence in low frame rate virtual environments. In: 2015 IEEE virtual reality (VR), pp 19–26Google Scholar
- 15.Kolasinski EM (1995) Simulator sickness in virtual environments. Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC)Google Scholar
- 18.Hart SG (2006) NASA-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX): 20 years later. In: 2006 human factors and ergonomics society (HFES) conference. HFES, pp 904–908Google Scholar
- 19.Hart SG, Staveland LE (1988) Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): results of empirical and theoretical research. In: Hancock PA, Meshkati N (eds) Human mental workload. North Holland Press, Amsterdam, pp 239–250Google Scholar
- 20.Human Performance Research Group (1997) NASA Task Load Index (TLX). NASA Ames Research CenterGoogle Scholar
- 21.Hoonakker PLT, Carayon P, Gurses A, Brown R, McGuire K, Khunlertkit A, Walker J (2011) Using the NASA Task Load Index (TLX) to measure workload of ICU nurses. J Healthc Eng 1:131–143Google Scholar
- 22.Bouchard S, Robillard RP (2007) Revising the factor structure of the simulator sickness questionnaire. Ann Rev CyberTherapy Telemed 5:117–122Google Scholar
- 23.Bouchard S, St-Jacques J, Renaud P, Wiederhold BK (2009) Side effects of immersions in virtual reality for people suffering from anxiety disorders. J CyberTherapy Rehabil 2:127–137Google Scholar
- 24.Regan EC (1993) Side-effects of immersion virtual reality. In: International applied military psychology symposium, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
- 29.Regan EC, Price K (1994) The frequency of occurence and severity of side-effects of immersion virtual reality. Aviat Psychol Environ Med 65:527–530Google Scholar