Back

Conventional vs Virtual Reality in Laparoscopic Training: Study Protocol of a Randomized Controlled Study

Kleiser, S.; Moreno-Alfonso, J. C.; Garnier, H.; Ulman, H.; Aubert, O.

2025-12-29 surgery
10.64898/2025.12.22.25342766 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe acquisition of laparoscopic skills is a key component of modern pediatric surgical training, yet structured hands-on exposure remains limited. Conventional box training is widely used but may be constrained by suboptimal visualization and ergonomics. Virtual reality (VR)-based approaches offer immersive visual perspectives and may enhance skill acquisition, motivation, and ergonomic performance. However, robust comparative data on VR-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic training remain limited. MethodsThis randomized controlled study evaluates the effectiveness of VR-assisted laparoscopic training compared with conventional training. 40-60 participants, including students, physicians and laypersons without prior laparoscopic experience, will be randomized to either a conventional training group or a VR-assisted training group. Both groups will complete a structured three-week training curriculum using pediatric laparoscopic box trainers and standardized tasks, including PEG transfer, laparoscopic suturing, cyst dissection and a validated esophageal atresia model. The intervention group will use 360 training videos and a VR headset, while the control group will train using standard 2D video material. Pre- and post-training assessments will be video-recorded and evaluated in a blinded manner using validated objective performance metrics (GOALS and OSATS), task-specific error definitions and time to task completion. Secondary outcomes include participant satisfaction, motivation, mental workload and musculoskeletal strain assessed with standardized questionnaires. All data will be pseudonymized and stored securely. ConclusionThis study aims to provide evidence on the role of VR-assisted training in laparoscopic skill acquisition and ergonomics. The findings may inform future training curricula in pediatric and minimally invasive surgery.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.