Gynecologic DiseaseRandomizedParallel DesignNCT03395821

REALITY Plus: Complete Statistical Analysis of Virtual Reality Training in Surgical Skills for ObGyn Residents

A statistical review of the randomized REALITY Plus trial comparing conventional training with virtual reality plus conventional training for surgical skills among ObGyn residents.

ClinicalTrials.gov record: NCT03395821

Scope of this record

This page provides an independent statistical analysis and educational interpretation of publicly reported results. ClinicalTrials.gov provides the official trial registry record.

1. Trial at a Glance

24
Enrollment
2
Arms
12 weeks
Primary endpoint timeframe
2017–2018
Trial period
FeatureREALITY Plus
TitleTraditional Versus Virtual Reality for Surgical Skills for ObGyn Residents
SponsorHospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre
PhaseNA
AllocationRandomized
MaskingNone
Primary purposeOther

2. Clinical Question

Population

ObGyn residents undergoing surgical skills training.

Intervention

Virtual Reality plus conventional training.

Comparator

Conventional training.

Primary question

Does adding virtual reality training affect technical skills efficiency?

3. Trial Design

The registry describes a randomized, parallel-group trial with two intervention groups and no masking.

Arm 1

Conventional training (behavioral).

Arm 2

Virtual Reality + conventional training (behavioral).

4. Endpoints

EndpointTime frameDescription
Efficiency of technical skills (%)12 weeksSoftware analysis of surgical performance measures including needle-holder positioning, tissue handling, needle loading, knot formation, suturing measures, and salpingectomy-related efficiency measures.

5. Statistical Methodology

The registry identifies a randomized comparison with a continuous percentage-based technical skills endpoint. A typical analysis for this endpoint would compare the efficiency measure between randomized groups using an appropriate two-group statistical method, with the exact model depending on the distribution of the outcome and prespecified analysis plan.

Planned Analysis

The registry reports measurement of efficiency of technical skills at 12 weeks. Results have not been posted on ClinicalTrials.gov.

6. Statistical Methods Explained

Why does randomization matter?

Randomization creates the intended basis for comparing training strategies because assignment is determined by the study design rather than participant characteristics.

What does a technical skills percentage measure represent?

A percentage-based efficiency endpoint summarizes performance using defined components of the surgical task. The interpretation depends on how the score is constructed and validated.

Why might continuous outcomes be useful in training studies?

Continuous measures can capture differences in degree of performance rather than only whether a participant reaches a predefined success threshold.

Why is the analysis method important?

The statistical method must match the structure of the outcome, sample size, and assumptions about measurement variability.

7. Limitations

8. Why This Trial Matters Statistically

ConceptApplication
Randomized designComparison of two training approaches through assigned groups.
Parallel groupsEach participant receives one assigned training strategy.
Continuous endpointTechnical skills efficiency measured as a percentage.
Measurement methodologySoftware-derived performance metrics provide structured assessment.
Sample size considerationsSmall randomized studies require careful interpretation of uncertainty.

9. Sources