Abstract

Anatomy training with real cadavers poses many practical problems for which new training and educational solutions have been developed making use of technologies based on real-time 3-D graphics. Although virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) have been previously used in the medical field, it is not easy to select the right 3-D technology or setup for each particular problem. For this reason, this article presents a comprehensive comparative study with 82 participants between two different 3-D interactive setups: an optical-based AR setup, implemented with a Microsoft HoloLens device, and a semi-immersive setup based on a VR Table. Both setups are tested using an anatomy training software application. Our primary hypothesis is that there would be statistically significant differences between the use of the AR application and the use of the VR Table. Our secondary hypothesis is that user preference and recommendation for the VR setup would be higher than for the HoloLens-based system. After completing two different tasks with both setups, the participants filled two questionnaires about the use of the anatomy training application. Three objective measures are also recorded (time, number of movements, and a score). The results of the experiments show that more than two-thirds of the users prefer, recommend, and find more useful the VR setup. The results also show that there are statistically significant differences in the use of both systems in favor of the VR Table.