Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 1:18 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-02-23 @ 1:42 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT06552195
Status:
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2024-08-13
First Post:
2024-08-09
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Augmented Reality in Learning Anatomy: The TEACHANATOMY Randomized Cross-over Trial
Sponsor:
Balgrist University Hospital
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Hologram-Based Augmented Reality in Learning Anatomy: The TEACHANATOMY Randomized Cross-over Trial
Status:
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2024-08
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
Cadaver use in anatomy education is undergoing several limitations in many universities, due to high costs, time constraints and supply difficulties. As alternatives to cadaver dissections, new teaching methods based on visual technologies, such as augmented reality (AR), are being implemented worldwide.
Augmented reality (AR), based on virtual interactive 3-dimensional elements (holograms) overlaid in the real-world, represents a promising alternative to explore the human body. In this study, we will test the efficacy of AR as an alternative teaching method in anatomy education by comparing traditional learning methods based on 2-dimensional (2D) images, videos, and online learning programs with the novel AR learning module The primary endpoint will consist of the score in the final theoretical and practical knowledge tests, assessed at two timepoints: immediately after the study session and after 3 months.
Secondary endpoints will include adverse health symptoms and user experience, assessed immediately after the study session.
Augmented reality (AR), based on virtual interactive 3-dimensional elements (holograms) overlaid in the real-world, represents a promising alternative to explore the human body. In this study, we will test the efficacy of AR as an alternative teaching method in anatomy education by comparing traditional learning methods based on 2-dimensional (2D) images, videos, and online learning programs with the novel AR learning module The primary endpoint will consist of the score in the final theoretical and practical knowledge tests, assessed at two timepoints: immediately after the study session and after 3 months.
Secondary endpoints will include adverse health symptoms and user experience, assessed immediately after the study session.
Detailed Description:
Cadaver use in anatomy education is undergoing several limitations in many universities, due to high costs, time constraints and supply difficulties. As alternatives to cadaver dissections, new teaching methods based on visual technologies, such as augmented reality (AR), are being implemented worldwide.
Augmented reality (AR), based on virtual interactive 3-dimensional elements (holograms) overlaid in the real-world, represents a promising alternative to explore the human body. In this study, we will test the efficacy of AR as an alternative teaching method in anatomy education. Our hypothesis is that learning with AR is more efficient than traditional learning methods.
Preparation: We will prepare 2 fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens to allow visualization of anatomical structure of the shoulder and hips. The cadavers will be obtained from a human body donated for university teaching activities. Using a digital single-lens reflex camera, we will acquire several images. These images will be then converted into a 3D model by the ROCS team at Balgrist University Hospital and optimized for use with the Magic Leap AR headset.
Procedure: Participants (approx. 300) will be randomly assigned to the AR or the traditional learning (TL) group. Each participant will learn one anatomy module with traditional learning methods, which will include books, access to websites, 3D videos, and online learning programs, and one module with the AR-based learning program. The two modules will be administered approximately 3 weeks apart.
Group A: Shoulder anatomy with traditional learning methods and hips anatomy with AR based 3D program.
Group B: Shoulder anatomy with AR based 3D program and hips anatomy with traditional learning methods.
The primary endpoint will consist of the score in the final theoretical and practical anatomy tests, assessed at two timepoints: immediately after the study session and after 3 months.
Secondary endpoints include adverse health symptoms, assessed with a Likert scale survey, and user experience, evaluated using an adapted NASA Task Load Index scale plus additional questions.
Augmented reality (AR), based on virtual interactive 3-dimensional elements (holograms) overlaid in the real-world, represents a promising alternative to explore the human body. In this study, we will test the efficacy of AR as an alternative teaching method in anatomy education. Our hypothesis is that learning with AR is more efficient than traditional learning methods.
Preparation: We will prepare 2 fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens to allow visualization of anatomical structure of the shoulder and hips. The cadavers will be obtained from a human body donated for university teaching activities. Using a digital single-lens reflex camera, we will acquire several images. These images will be then converted into a 3D model by the ROCS team at Balgrist University Hospital and optimized for use with the Magic Leap AR headset.
Procedure: Participants (approx. 300) will be randomly assigned to the AR or the traditional learning (TL) group. Each participant will learn one anatomy module with traditional learning methods, which will include books, access to websites, 3D videos, and online learning programs, and one module with the AR-based learning program. The two modules will be administered approximately 3 weeks apart.
Group A: Shoulder anatomy with traditional learning methods and hips anatomy with AR based 3D program.
Group B: Shoulder anatomy with AR based 3D program and hips anatomy with traditional learning methods.
The primary endpoint will consist of the score in the final theoretical and practical anatomy tests, assessed at two timepoints: immediately after the study session and after 3 months.
Secondary endpoints include adverse health symptoms, assessed with a Likert scale survey, and user experience, evaluated using an adapted NASA Task Load Index scale plus additional questions.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: