Novel Technology for Learning in Medicine

  • Vanda LuengoEmail author
  • Annette Aboulafia
  • Adélaïde Blavier
  • George Shorten
  • Lucile Vadcard
  • Jan Zottmann

In this chapter we will present some medical educational approaches together with their links to different learning objectives and learning situations. We will also present various forms of computer-based technology, which aim to enhance the teaching and learning capabilities of doctors, mostly in the form of 3D visualisation, simulation and haptic technology. We will focus on research conducted in the areas of spinal anaesthesia, surgery and emergency. Finally, we will emphasise some challenges of our domain which are related to the interaction between medical education, technological and computer factors.


Technology-enhanced learning Simulation Medical education spinal anaesthesia Surgery and emergency 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aggarwal, R., & Darzi, A. (2006). Technical-skills training in the 21st century. New England Journal of Medicine, 355, 2695–2696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahlberg, G., Enochsson,L., Gallagher,A. G., Hedman,L., Hogman,D., McClusky,D. A., et al. (2007). Proficiency-based virtual reality training significantly reduces the error rate for residents during their first 10 laparoscopic cholecystectomies, American Journal of Surgery, 193, 797–804.Google Scholar
  3. Albanese, M., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 68, 52–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 68, 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blavier, A., Gaudissart,Q., Cadiére,G. B., & Nyssen, A. S. (2007). Comparison of learning curves in classical and robotic laparoscopy according to the viewing condition. American Journal of Surgery, 194, 115–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations: Didactiques des mathèmatiques 1970–1990 (N. Balacheff, M. Cooper, R. Sutherland & V. Warfield, Trans., Eds.). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  7. Clancey, W. J. (1983). GUIDON. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 10, 8–14.Google Scholar
  8. Colliver, J. A. (2000). Effectiveness of problem-based learning curricula: Research and theory. Academic Medicine, 75, 259–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dochy, F., Segers,M., van den Bossche, P., & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 13, 533–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Forbes, T. L., DeRose,G., Kribs,S. W., & Harris, K. A. (2004). Cumulative sum failure analysis of the learning curve with endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 39, 102–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gaba, D. M., Howard,S. K., Flanagan,B., Smith,B. E., Fish,K. J., & Botney, R. (1998). Assessment of clinical performance during simulated crises using both technical and behavioral ratings. Anesthesiology, 89, 8–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gallagher, A. G., & Satava, R. M. (2002). Virtual reality as a metric for the assessment of laparoscopic psychomotor skills: Learning curves and reliability measures. Surgical Endoscopy, 16, 1746–1752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gijbels, D., Dochy,F., van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational Research, 75, 27–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hamilton, E. C., Scott,D. J., Fleming,J. B., Rege,R. V., Laycock,R., Bergen,P. C., et al. (2002). Comparison of video trainer and virtual reality training. Surgical Endoscopy, 16, 406–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hertel, G. (2000). Motivation gains in groups: A brief review of the state of the art. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 31, 169–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Issenberg, S. B., McGaghie,W. C., Hart,I. R., Mayer,J. W., Felner,J. M., Petrusa,E. R., et al. (1999). Simulation technology for health care professional skills training and assessment. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 282, 861–866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. King, A. (2007). Scripting collaborative learning processes: A cognitive perspective. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl & J. M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer supported communication of knowledge: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives (pp. 13–37). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  18. Kulcsár, Z, Aboulafia, A., Hall,T., & Shorten, G. (2008, June). Determinants of learning to perform spinal anaesthesia – a qualitative study. European Journal of Anaesthesiology EJA. 5, 1–6.Google Scholar
  19. Lajoie, S. P., & Azevedo, R. (2006). Teaching and learning in technology-rich environments. In P. Alexander & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (2nd edn.) (pp. 803–821). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Lillehaug, S. I., & Lajoie, S. P. (1998). AI in medical education: Another grand challenge for medical informatics. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 12, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Luengo, V., & Vadcard, L. (2005). Design of adaptive feedback in a web educational system. In P. Brusilovsky, R. Conejo & E. Millán (Eds.), Adaptive systems for Web-based education: Tools and reusability (pp. 9–17). Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lycke, K. H., Grottum,P., & Stromso, H. I. (2006). Student learning strategies, mental models, and learning outcomes in problem-based and traditional curricula in medicine. Medical Teacher, 28, 717–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Marotta, J. J., & Goodale, M. A. (1998). The role of learned pictorial cues in the programming and control of grasping. Experimental Brain Research, 121, 465–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rall, M., & Gaba, D. M. (2005). Human performance and patient safety. In R. D. Miller (Ed.), Anaestesiology (pp. 3021–3072). Baltimore, MD: Lippincott.Google Scholar
  25. Romero, C., Ventura,S., Gibaja,E. L., Hervás,C., & Romero, F. (2006). Web-based adaptive training simulator system for cardiac life support. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 38, 67–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ross, H. E., & Murray, D. J. (Eds.). (1996). E. H. Weber on the Tactile Sense. Hampshire, United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  27. Samurçay, R. (1995). Conceptual models for training. In J.-M. Hoc, P. C. Cacciabue & E. Hollnagel (Eds.), Expertise and technology: Cognition and human-computer cooperation (pp. 107–124). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  28. Schön D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  29. Shaffer, D. W., Dawson,S. L., Meglan,D., Cotin,S., Ferrell,M., Norbash,A., et al. (2001). Design principles for the use of simulation as an aid in interventional cardiology training. Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, 10, 75–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sidhu, R. S., Tompa,D., Jang,R., Grober,E. D., Johnston,K. W., Reznick,R. K., et al. (2004). Interpretation of three-dimensional structure from two-dimensional endovascular images: Implications for educators in vascular surgery. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 39, 1305–1311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stone, R., & McCloy, R. (2004). Ergonomics in medicine and surgery. BMJ, 328, 1115–1118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vadcard, L., & Luengo, V. (2005). Interdisciplinary approach for the design of a learning environment. In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2005 (pp. 2461–2468). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  33. Zottmann, J., Dieckmann,P., Rall,M., Fischer,F., & Taraszow, T. (2006, June). Fostering simulation-based learning in medical education with collaboration scripts. Paper presented at the 12th Annual Meeting of the Society in Europe for Simulation Applied to Medicine (SESAM), Porto, Portugal.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vanda Luengo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Annette Aboulafia
    • 2
  • Adélaïde Blavier
    • 3
  • George Shorten
    • 4
  • Lucile Vadcard
    • 5
  • Jan Zottmann
    • 6
  1. 1.Laboratory of Informatics of GrenobleUniversity Joseph Fourier (Grenoble 1)France
  2. 2.Interaction Design CentreUniversity of LimerickIreland
  3. 3.Faculty of Psychology and Educational SciencesNational Fund for Scientific Research, University of LiègeBelgium
  4. 4.Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care MedicineUniversity College Cork, Cork University HospitalIreland
  5. 5.Laboratory for Educational SciencesUniversity of GrenobleFrance
  6. 6.Department of PsychologyUniversity of MunichGermany

Personalised recommendations