Can mixed reality technologies teach surgical skills better than traditional methods? A prospective randomised feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Basic surgical skills teaching is often delivered with didactic audio-visual content, and new digital technologies may allow more engaging and effective ways of teaching to be developed. The Microsoft HoloLens 2 (HL2) is a multi-functional mixed reality headset. This prospective feasibility study sought to assess the device as a tool for enhancing technical surgical skills training. METHODS: A prospective randomised feasibility study was conducted. 36 novice medical students were trained to perform a basic arteriotomy and closure using a synthetic model. Participants were randomised to receive a structured surgical skills tutorial via a bespoke mixed reality HL2 tutorial (n = 18), or via a standard video-based tutorial (n = 18). Proficiency scores were assessed by blinded examiners using a validated objective scoring system and participant feedback collected. RESULTS: The HL2 group showed significantly greater improvement in overall technical proficiency compared to the video group (10.1 vs. 6.89, p = 0.0076), and a greater consistency in skill progression with a significantly narrower range of scores (SD 2.48 vs. 4.03, p = 0.026). Participant feedback showed the HL2 technology to be more interactive and engaging with minimal device related problems experienced. CONCLUSIONS: This study has demonstrated that mixed reality technology may provide a higher quality educational experience, improved skill progression and greater consistency in learning when compared to traditional teaching methodologies for basic surgical skills. Further work is required to refine, translate, and evaluate the scalability and applicability of the technology across a broad range of skills-based disciplines.

The use of mixed reality technology for the objective assessment of clinical skills: a validation study.

BACKGROUND: Mixed Reality technology may provide many advantages over traditional teaching methods. Despite its potential, the technology has yet to be used for the formal assessment of clinical competency. This study sought to collect validity evidence and assess the feasibility of using the HoloLens 2 mixed reality headset for the conduct and augmentation of Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs). METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted to compare the assessment of undergraduate medical students undertaking OSCEs via HoloLens 2 live (HLL) and recorded (HLR), and gold-standard in-person (IP) methods. An augmented mixed reality scenario was also assessed. RESULTS: Thirteen undergraduate participants completed a total of 65 OSCE stations. Overall inter-modality correlation was 0.81 (p = 0.01), 0.98 (p = 0.01) and 0.82 (p = 0.01) for IP vs. HLL, HLL vs. HLR and IP vs. HLR respectively. Skill based correlations for IP vs. HLR were assessed for history taking (0.82, p = 0.01), clinical examination (0.81, p = 0.01), procedural (0.88, p = 0.01) and clinical skills (0.92, p = 0.01), and assessment of a virtual mixed reality patient (0.74, p = 0.01). The HoloLens device was deemed to be usable and practical (Standard Usability Scale (SUS) score = 51.5), and the technology was thought to deliver greater flexibility and convenience, and have the potential to expand and enhance assessment opportunities. CONCLUSIONS: HoloLens 2 is comparable to traditional in-person examination of undergraduate medical students for both live and recorded assessments, and therefore is a valid and robust method for objectively assessing performance. The technology is in its infancy, and users need to develop confidence in its usability and reliability as an assessment tool. However, the potential to integrate additional functionality including holographic content, automated tracking and data analysis, and to facilitate remote assessment may allow the technology to enhance, expand and standardise examinations across a range of educational contexts.

Insights from a global snapshot of the change in elective colorectal practice due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: There is a need to understand the impact of COVID-19 on colorectal cancer care globally and determine drivers of variation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate COVID-19 impact on colorectal cancer services globally and identify predictors for behaviour change. DESIGN: An online survey of colorectal cancer service change globally in May and June 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Attending or consultant surgeons involved in the care of patients with colorectal cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in the delivery of diagnostics (diagnostic endoscopy), imaging for staging, therapeutics and surgical technique in the management of colorectal cancer. Predictors of change included increased hospital bed stress, critical care bed stress, mortality and world region. RESULTS: 191 responses were included from surgeons in 159 centers across 46 countries, demonstrating widespread service reduction with global variation. Diagnostic endoscopy was reduced in 93% of responses, even with low hospital stress and mortality; whilst rising critical care bed stress triggered complete cessation (p = 0.02). Availability of CT and MRI fell by 40-41%, with MRI significantly reduced with high hospital stress. Neoadjuvant therapy use in rectal cancer changed in 48% of responses, where centers which had ceased surgery increased its use (62 vs 30%, p = 0.04) as did those with extended delays to surgery (p<0.001). High hospital and critical care bed stresses were associated with surgeons forming more stomas (p<0.04), using more experienced operators (p<0.003) and decreased laparoscopy use (critical care bed stress only, p<0.001). Patients were also more actively prioritized for resection, with increased importance of co-morbidities and ICU need. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with severe restrictions in the availability of colorectal cancer services on a global scale, with significant variation in behaviours which cannot be fully accounted for by hospital burden or mortality.

A regulatory perspective on the influence of health information technology on organisational quality and safety in England.

Health information technology can transform and enhance the quality and safety of care, but it may also introduce new risks. This study analysed 130 healthcare regulator inspection reports and organisational digital maturity scores in order to characterise the impact of health information technology on quality and safety from a regulatory perspective. Although digital maturity and the positive use of health information technology are significantly associated with overall organisational quality, the negative effects of health information technology are frequently and more commonly identified by regulators. The poor usability of technology, lack of easy access to systems and data and the incorrect use of health information technology are the most commonly identified areas adversely affecting quality and safety. There is a need to understand the full risks and benefits of health information technology from the perspective of all stakeholders, including patients, end-users, providers and regulators in order to best inform future practice and regulation.

The impact of mobile technology on teamwork and communication in hospitals: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Effective communication is critical to the safe delivery of care but is characterized by outdated technologies. Mobile technology has the potential to transform communication and teamwork but the evidence is currently uncertain. The objective of this systematic review was to summarize the quality and breadth of evidence for the impact of mobile technologies on communication and teamwork in hospitals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, HMIC, Cochrane Library, and National Institute of Health Research Health Technology Assessment) were searched for English language publications reporting communication- or teamwork-related outcomes from mobile technologies in the hospital setting between 2007 and 2017. RESULTS: We identified 38 publications originating from 30 studies. Only 11% were of high quality and none met best practice guidelines for mobile-technology-based trials. The studies reported a heterogenous range of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods outcomes. There is a lack of high-quality evidence, but nonetheless mobile technology can lead to improvements in workflow, strengthen the quality and efficiency of communication, and enhance accessibility and interteam relationships. DISCUSSION: This review describes the potential benefits that mobile technology can deliver and that mobile technology is ubiquitous among healthcare professionals. Crucially, it highlights the paucity of high-quality evidence for its effectiveness and identifies common barriers to widespread uptake. Limitations include the limited number of participants and a wide variability in methods and reported outcomes. CONCLUSION: Evidence suggests that mobile technology has the potential to significantly improve communication and teamwork in hospital provided key organizational, technological, and security challenges are tackled and better evidence delivered.

The effects and preventability of 2627 patient safety incidents related to health information technology failures: a retrospective analysis of 10 years of incident reporting in England and Wales.

BACKGROUND: The use of health information technology (IT) is rapidly increasing to support improvements in the delivery of care. Although health IT is delivering huge benefits, new technology can also introduce unique risks. Despite these risks, evidence on the preventability and effects of health IT failures on patients is scarce. In our study we therefore sought to evaluate the preventability and effects of health IT failures by examining patient safety incidents in England and Wales. METHODS: We designed our study as a retrospective analysis of 10 years of incident reporting in England and Wales. We used text mining with the words "computer", "system", "workstation", and "network" to explore free-text incident descriptors to identify incidents related to health IT failures following a previously described approach. We then applied an n-gram model of searching to identify contiguous sequences of words and provide spatial context. We examined incident details, recorded harm, and preventability. Standard descriptive statistics were applied. Degree of harm was identified according to standardised definitions and preventability was assessed by two independent reviewers. FINDINGS: We identified 2627 incidents related to health IT failures. 2557 (97%) of 2627 incidents were assessed for harm (70 incidents were excluded). 2106 (82%) of 2557 health IT failures caused no harm to patients, 331 (13%) caused low harm, 102 (4%) caused moderate harm, 14 (1%) caused severe harm, and four (<1%) contributed to the death of a patient. 1964 (75%) of 2627 incidents were deemed to be preventable. INTERPRETATION: Health IT is fundamental to the delivery of high-quality care, yet there is a poor understanding of the effects of IT failures on patient safety and whether they can be prevented. Failures are complex and involve interlinked aspects of technology, people, and the environment. Health IT failures are undoubtedly a potential source of substantial harm, but they are likely to be under-reported. Worryingly, three-quarters of IT failures are potentially preventable. There is a need to see health IT as a fundamental tenet of patient safety, develop better methods for capturing the effects of IT failures on patients, and adopt simple measures to reduce their probability and mitigate their risk. FUNDING: The National Institutes of Health Research Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre at Imperial College London.