Immersive and non-immersive virtual reality: A quasi-experimental study in undergraduate nursing education

IF 2.5 3区医学 Q1 NURSING Clinical Simulation in Nursing Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-11 DOI:10.1016/j.ecns.2024.101682

Patrick Lavoie RN, PhD , Louise-Andrée Brien RN, MSc , Isabelle Ledoux RN, PhD , Émilie Gosselin RN, PhD , Imène Khetir RN, MSc , Maude Crétaz RN, MSc , Nadia Turgeon MA

{"title":"Immersive and non-immersive virtual reality: A quasi-experimental study in undergraduate nursing education","authors":"Patrick Lavoie RN, PhD , Louise-Andrée Brien RN, MSc , Isabelle Ledoux RN, PhD , Émilie Gosselin RN, PhD , Imène Khetir RN, MSc , Maude Crétaz RN, MSc , Nadia Turgeon MA","doi":"10.1016/j.ecns.2024.101682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Immersive virtual reality (VR) is considered more engaging and realistic than non-immersive VR, but direct comparisons in nursing education are limited.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This non-randomized quasi-experimental study explored undergraduate nursing students’ experiences in a home care simulation experience using immersive VR at the university (via VR headsets) or non-immersive VR at home (desktop simulation). A post-test survey incorporating qualitative feedback assessed engagement, satisfaction, confidence in learning, cognitive load, mental effort, and clinical reasoning.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Engagement levels were similar across VR modalities. Immersive VR participants reported higher confidence and enthusiasm, while non-immersive VR participants reported greater mental effort and intrinsic cognitive load. Satisfaction, extraneous cognitive load, essential cognitive load, and clinical reasoning showed no significant differences between groups.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Both immersive and non-immersive VR supported student engagement and learning. Remote, non-immersive VR emerged as a cost-effective alternative that offers similar educational benefits while requiring fewer resources.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48753,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Simulation in Nursing","volume":"99 ","pages":"Article 101682"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Simulation in Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876139924001749","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Immersive virtual reality (VR) is considered more engaging and realistic than non-immersive VR, but direct comparisons in nursing education are limited.

Methods

This non-randomized quasi-experimental study explored undergraduate nursing students’ experiences in a home care simulation experience using immersive VR at the university (via VR headsets) or non-immersive VR at home (desktop simulation). A post-test survey incorporating qualitative feedback assessed engagement, satisfaction, confidence in learning, cognitive load, mental effort, and clinical reasoning.

Results

Engagement levels were similar across VR modalities. Immersive VR participants reported higher confidence and enthusiasm, while non-immersive VR participants reported greater mental effort and intrinsic cognitive load. Satisfaction, extraneous cognitive load, essential cognitive load, and clinical reasoning showed no significant differences between groups.

Conclusion

Both immersive and non-immersive VR supported student engagement and learning. Remote, non-immersive VR emerged as a cost-effective alternative that offers similar educational benefits while requiring fewer resources.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

沉浸式与非沉浸式虚拟现实：本科护理教育的准实验研究

沉浸式虚拟现实（VR）被认为比非沉浸式虚拟现实更具吸引力和真实感，但在护理教育中的直接比较有限。方法本研究采用非随机准实验的方法，对本科护生进行沉浸式VR（通过VR头显）和非沉浸式VR（桌面模拟）的家庭护理模拟体验。一项包含定性反馈的测试后调查评估了参与、满意度、学习信心、认知负荷、精神努力和临床推理。结果不同虚拟现实模式的参与水平相似。沉浸式VR参与者报告了更高的信心和热情，而非沉浸式VR参与者报告了更大的心理努力和内在认知负荷。满意度、外部认知负荷、基本认知负荷和临床推理在组间无显著差异。结论沉浸式和非沉浸式VR均支持学生参与和学习。远程、非沉浸式VR作为一种具有成本效益的替代方案出现了，它提供了类似的教育效益，同时需要的资源更少。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Clinical Simulation in Nursing NURSING-

CiteScore

5.50

自引率

15.40%

发文量

107

期刊介绍： Clinical Simulation in Nursing is an international, peer reviewed journal published online monthly. Clinical Simulation in Nursing is the official journal of the International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation & Learning (INACSL) and reflects its mission to advance the science of healthcare simulation. We will review and accept articles from other health provider disciplines, if they are determined to be of interest to our readership. The journal accepts manuscripts meeting one or more of the following criteria: Research articles and literature reviews (e.g. systematic, scoping, umbrella, integrative, etc.) about simulation Innovative teaching/learning strategies using simulation Articles updating guidelines, regulations, and legislative policies that impact simulation Leadership for simulation Simulation operations Clinical and academic uses of simulation.