Training outcomes for audiology students using virtual reality or traditional training methods

Due to limited space and resources, it can be difficult to train students on audiological procedures adequately. In the present study, we compared audiology training outcomes between a traditional approach and a recently developed immersive virtual reality (VR) approach in audiology students. Twenty...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PloS one Vol. 15; no. 12; p. e0243380
Main Authors: Bakhos, David, Galvin, John, Aoustin, Jean-Marie, Robier, Mathieu, Kerneis, Sandrine, Bechet, Garance, Montembault, Norbert, Laurent, Stéphane, Godey, Benoit, Aussedat, Charles
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: United States Public Library of Science 03.12.2020
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Subjects:
Adolescent
Audiology
Audiology - education
Biology and Life Sciences
Computer and Information Sciences
Computer applications
Engineering and Technology
Feedback
Hearing loss
High Fidelity Simulation Training - methods
Humans
Immersive virtual reality
Internships
Medical education
Medical students
Medicine and Health Sciences
Otolaryngology
Patients
People and Places
Personal Satisfaction
Professional Competence - statistics & numerical data
Prospective Studies
Ratings
Self Concept
Social Sciences
Students
Students, Health Occupations - psychology
Students, Health Occupations - statistics & numerical data
Study and teaching
Training
Training evaluation
Virtual Reality
Young Adult
Brazil
France
ISSN:1932-6203, 1932-6203
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Due to limited space and resources, it can be difficult to train students on audiological procedures adequately. In the present study, we compared audiology training outcomes between a traditional approach and a recently developed immersive virtual reality (VR) approach in audiology students. Twenty-nine first-year audiology students participated in the study; 14 received traditional training (“TT group”), and 15 received the VR training (“VRT group”). Pre- and post-training evaluation included a 20-item test developed by an audiology educator. Post-training satisfaction and self-confidence were evaluated using Likert scales. Mean post-training test scores improved by 6.9±9.8 percentage points in the TT group and by 21.1±7.8 points in the VRT group; the improvement in scores was significant for both groups. After completing the traditional training, the TT group was subsequently trained with the VR system, after which mean scores further improved by 7.5 points; there was no significant difference in post-VR training scores between the TT and VRT groups. After training, the TT and VRT groups completed satisfaction and self-confidence questionnaires. Satisfaction and self-confidence ratings were significantly higher for the VR training group, compared to the traditional training group. Satisfaction ratings were “good” (4 on Likert scale) for 74% of the TT group and 100% of the VRT group. Self-confidence ratings were “good” for 71% of the TT group and 92% of the VRT group. These results suggest that a VR training approach may be an effective alternative or supplement to traditional training for audiology students.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
Competing Interests: JMA, MR, NM are employees of Audilab. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products to declare. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0243380