Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 5, 2025
Author Spotlight: Segmentation and VR for Advanced Neurovascular Interventions
Published on: April 5, 2024
The Utility of Virtual Reality in Orthopedic Surgical Training
Nicolas Cevallos1, Brian Zukotynski2, Danielle Greig2
1UCSF School of Medicine, San Francisco, California.
Objective:
To examine the efficacy of virtual reality (VR) to prepare surgical trainees for a pediatric orthopedic surgery procedure: pinning of a slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE).
Design:
Participants were randomly assigned to a standard, study guide (SG) group or to a VR training group. All participants were provided a technique video and SG; the VR group additionally trained via an Osso VR surgical trainer (ossovr.com) with real-time feedback and coaching from an attending pediatric orthopedic surgeon. Following training, participants performed a SCFE guidewire placement on a SawBones model embedded in a soft-tissue envelope (SawBones model 1161). Participants were asked to achieve "ideal placement" based on the training provided. Participants were evaluated on time, number of pin "in-and outs," penetration of the articular surface, angle between the pin and the physis, distance from pin tip to subchondral bone and distance from the center-center point of the epiphysis.
Setting:
Orthopedic Institute for Children, Los Angeles, CA.
Participants:
Twenty fourth-year medical students, first- and second-year orthopedic residents without experience with the SCFE procedure.
Results:
Twenty participants were randomized to SG (n = 10) or VR (n = 10). Average time to final pin placement was 19% shorter in VR group (706 vs 573 seconds, p = 0.26). When compared to SG, the VR group had, on average, 70% less pin in-and-outs (1.7 vs 0.5, p = 0.28), 50% less articular surface penetrations (0.4 vs 0.2, p = 0.36), and 18% smaller distance from pin tip to subchondral bone on lateral view (7.1 vs 5.8 mm, p = 0.42). Moreover, the VR group had a lower average angle deviation between pin and line perpendicular to the physis on coronal view (4.9° vs 2.5°, p < 0.05).
Conclusions:
VR training is potentially more effective than traditional preparatory methods. This pilot study suggests that VR training may be a viable surgical training tool, which may alleviate constraints of time, money, and safety concerns with resultant broad applicability for surgical education.
