KHPLEI
Search
- Page Path
- HOME > Search
Research article
- Mixed reality versus manikins in basic life support simulation-based training for medical students in France: the mixed reality non-inferiority randomized controlled trial
-
Sofia Barlocco De La Vega
, Evelyne Guerif-Dubreucq, Jebrane Bouaoud, Myriam Awad, Léonard Mathon, Agathe Beauvais, Thomas Olivier, Pierre-Clément Thiébaud, Anne-Laure Philippon - J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2025;22:15. Published online May 12, 2025
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2025.22.15
- 4,890 View
- 383 Download
- 3 Web of Science
- 4 Crossref
-
Abstract
PDF
Supplementary Material - Purpose
To compare the effectiveness of mixed reality with traditional manikin-based simulation in basic life support (BLS) training, testing the hypothesis that mixed reality is non-inferior to manikin-based simulation.
Methods
A non-inferiority randomized controlled trial was conducted. Third-year medical students were randomized into 2 groups. The mixed reality group received 32 minutes of individual training using a virtual reality headset and a torso for chest compressions (CC). The manikin group participated in 2 hours of group training consisting of theoretical and practical sessions using a low-fidelity manikin. The primary outcome was the overall BLS performance score, assessed at 1 month through a standardized BLS scenario using a 10-item assessment scale. The quality of CC, student satisfaction, and confidence levels were secondary outcomes and assessed through superiority analyses.
Results
Data from 155 participants were analyzed, with 84 in the mixed reality group and 71 in the manikin group. The mean overall BLS performance score was 6.4 (mixed reality) vs. 6.5 (manikin), (mean difference, –0.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], –0.45 to +∞). CC depth was greater in the manikin group (50.3 mm vs. 46.6 mm; mean difference, –3.7 mm; 95% CI, –6.5 to –0.9), with 61.2% achieving optimal depth compared to 43.8% in the mixed reality group (mean difference, 17.4%; 95% CI, –29.3 to –5.5). Satisfaction was higher in the mixed reality group (4.9/5 vs. 4.7/5 in the manikin group; difference, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.33), as was confidence in performing BLS (3.9/5 vs. 3.6/5; difference, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.58). No other significant differences were observed for secondary outcomes.
Conclusion
Mixed reality is non-inferior to manikin simulation in terms of overall BLS performance score assessed at 1 month. -
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
- Enhancing virtual reality applications for adult basic life support: insights from a comparative analysis
Nino Fijačko, Benjamin S. Abella, Vinay M. Nadkarni, Špela Metličar, Anne-Astrid Agten, Robert Greif
Virtual Reality.2026;[Epub] CrossRef - Enhancing STEM and STEAM Education at the Grade Level Through Mixed Reality Applications: A Meta-analytical Study
Segun Michael Ojetunde, Umesh Ramnarain
Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education.2026;[Epub] CrossRef - Collocated mixed reality for basic life support training in medical students: a randomised pilot feasibility trial
David Maiershon, Jonathan Giron, Vered Daitch, Yael Feinstein, Hadas Leibovich-Kot, Shlomit Tovbis, Tohar Levartovsky Ovadiya, Hadar Lavi, Ben Hazan, Maxim Lantsman, Alon Basker, Miri Mizrahi Reuveni
Resuscitation Plus.2026; : 101383. CrossRef - IMPACTOS DO USO DE SIMULAÇÃO IMERSIVA NA CAPACITAÇÃO EM ATENDIMENTO À PARADA CARDIORRESPIRATÓRIA
Iago Brenner Farias Leal, Izabelly Ferreira de Andrade, Yan Carlos de Sousa Diniz, Lara Maria Ferreira Lopes Valéri Pinto, Maria Helena Vieira Pereira Marques, Francisca Evelyn Abreu de Lira, Thaís Helena Gomes de Sousa, Maria Isabelly Araújo Ferreira, A
Revista Multidisciplinar do Nordeste Mineiro.2025; 16(1): 1. CrossRef
- Enhancing virtual reality applications for adult basic life support: insights from a comparative analysis
First
Prev
