Augmented Reality for Guideline Presentation in Medicine: Randomized Crossover Simulation Trial for Technically Assisted Decision-making
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 16, 2025
Author Spotlight: Revolutionizing Remote Surgery with Augmented Reality and Robotics for Enhanced Precision and Accessibility
Published on: August 9, 2024
Andreas Follmann1, Alexander Ruhl1, Michael Gösch2
1Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Background:
Guidelines provide instructions for diagnostics and therapy in modern medicine. Various mobile devices are used to represent the potential complex decision trees. An example of time-critical decisions is triage in case of a mass casualty incident.
Objective:
In this randomized controlled crossover study, the potential of augmented reality for guideline presentation was evaluated and compared with the guideline presentation provided in a tablet PC as a conventional device.
Methods:
A specific Android app was designed for use with smart glasses and a tablet PC for the presentation of a triage algorithm as an example for a complex guideline. Forty volunteers simulated a triage based on 30 fictional patient descriptions, each with technical support from smart glasses and a tablet PC in a crossover trial design. The time to come to a decision and the accuracy were recorded and compared between both devices.
Results:
A total of 2400 assessments were performed by the 40 volunteers. A significantly faster time to triage was achieved in total with the tablet PC (median 12.8 seconds, IQR 9.4-17.7; 95% CI 14.1-14.9) compared to that to triage with smart glasses (median 17.5 seconds, IQR 13.2-22.8, 95% CI 18.4-19.2; P=.001). Considering the difference in the triage time between both devices, the additional time needed with the smart glasses could be reduced significantly in the course of assessments (21.5 seconds, IQR 16.5-27.3, 95% CI 21.6-23.2) in the first run, 17.4 seconds (IQR 13-22.4, 95% CI 17.6-18.9) in the second run, and 14.9 seconds (IQR 11.7-18.6, 95% CI 15.2-16.3) in the third run (P=.001). With regard to the accuracy of the guideline decisions, there was no significant difference between both the devices.
Conclusions:
The presentation of a guideline on a tablet PC as well as through augmented reality achieved good results. The implementation with smart glasses took more time owing to their more complex operating concept but could be accelerated in the course of the study after adaptation. Especially in a non-time-critical working area where hands-free interfaces are useful, a guideline presentation with augmented reality can be of great use during clinical management.
