| Autor: |
Colback AA; University of California, Davis-School of Medicine, Sacramento, California, USA., Velazquez-Castro O; University of California, Davis-School of Medicine, Sacramento, California, USA., Agarrado M; University of California, Davis-School of Medicine, Sacramento, California, USA., Reddy R; Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California, USA., Strong EB; Department of BioEngineering, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA., Wilson M; Division of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, California, USA., Strong EB; Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California, USA. |
| Abstrakt: |
Background: Patients may be educated about facial fractures using two-dimensional computed tomography (2DCT); however, three-dimensional mixed reality (3DMR) goggles may improve patient education by delivering content in an immersive environment. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of 2DCT and 3DMR formats used for patient education on facial fractures, as measured by surveys. Methods: In this prospective, randomized, crossover study, video tutorials intended for facial fracture informed consent were created in 2DCT and 3DMR formats from a single CT data set of a zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fracture. Subjects were randomly assigned into two groups. Group 1 ( n = 25) viewed the 2DCT tutorial, answered self-assessment and information recall surveys, viewed the 3DMR tutorial, repeated the prior surveys as well as a comparison survey. Group 2 ( n = 25) followed the same sequence but viewed the 3DMR tutorial and then the 2DCT tutorial. Results: Participants ( n = 50) had no differences in age (group 1-51.9 years/standard deviation [SD] 20.9; group 2-44.7 years/SD 17.6 years; p = 0.223), gender (group 1-10 male/15 female; group 2-11 male/14 female; p = 0.999), college education level (group 1-25 yes; group 2-25 yes; p = 0.844), or prior 2DCT or 3DMR experience (group 1-9 yes/16 no; group 2-13 yes/12 no; p = 0.393). The 3DMR format was preferred over 2DCT ( p < 0.05), and it was reported to enhance understanding as compared to 2DCT ( p < 0.05). No differences for information recall were noted ( p = 0.753). Conclusion: In this study, participants preferred 3DMR goggles over 2DCT for a simulated ZMC fracture-informed consent. |
