261238 Social Virtual Reality, Patients, and Providers: Not Ready for Primetime

Tuesday, October 30, 2012 : 12:30 PM - 12:50 PM

Richard Goldsworthy, MSEd, PhD , Academic Edge, Inc., Bloomington, IN
David Marrero, PhD , Director, Diabetes Translational Research Center, Division of Endocrinology & Metabolism, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis
Background. Social virtual realities (SVRs) continue to receive interest, funding, and occasional hype as solutions to public health training and, more recently, patient communication and support problems, primarily because they are “social”: people can meet and congregate, role-play can become untied from physical location, as can patient-provider interactions. Purpose. To separate the virtual from the reality, by reflecting on our experiences with two large-scale, multi-year NIH-funded projects that explored SVR use with two quite different public health problems: improving healthcare provider education, in this case, related to SBIRT; and, second, improving patient management of diabetes. From design to evaluation, both projects were grounded in respected behavior and professional development theories, and guided by an established, iterative, user-centered design and development methodology. Results. We developed two virtual worlds: a primary care clinic for providers and residents to learn about and practice SBIRT and a Diabetes Guidance Center for diabetes patients to interact with experts and providers, and to engage learning materials and support tools. For both worlds, we were generally able to implement, to varying degrees of fidelity, what we wanted to support the project objectives. However, numerous limitations and challenges emerged, and although participants frequently found the SVR usable and innovative, noting the technology's potential, numerous interface and cognitive overhead issues were also identified. Discussion. We will argue that while it is possible to create SVR experiences that accomplish key provider training or patient support goals, and that there are some significant benefits to doing so, the costs, especially in terms of production and implementation complexity as well as user overhead, simply do not justify the benefits. Quite simply, there is no single thing that can be done in a social virtual world that cannot be done as well, and quite likely more elegantly and effectively, through other methods...yet....

Learning Areas:
Chronic disease management and prevention
Communication and informatics
Implementation of health education strategies, interventions and programs

Learning Objectives:
Participants will be able to: 1. Describe existing research and theory regarding the potential of social virtual reality for improving medical management generally and diabetes management specifically 2. Using real-world data and case examples from completed and ongoing research projects, assess the "reality" of social virtual reality for patient support, including the not insignificant barriers to adoption and implementation 3. List the big 3 barriers to SVR use and the explain the single most important question for future efforts

Keywords: New Technology, Medical Care

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I have over 15 years experience as principle investigator and lead researcher on a variety of public health educational and behavioral change effort. I am presently the principle investigator on the large scale NIH challenge grant supporting the research described in this abstract. My colleague is a nationally recognized expert in diabetes management and in technological efforts to augment care.
Any relevant financial relationships? No

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.

Back to: 4221.0: HIIT Innovation Part 1