Video instruction outscored VR for hospital PPE training in non-randomized study

Immersive virtual reality training for personal protective equipment was rated favorably by healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic, while standard video-based instruction received higher scores in two assessed areas at a university hospital. In a non-randomized comparison conducted across hospital and primary care settings, both approaches were perceived as acceptable for training workers to safely don and doff PPE. The findings concern participants’ reported experiences rather than measured improvements in clinical performance.

The quasi-experimental post-intervention study took place from January through December 2021 at a university hospital and five primary care centers. A total of 711 healthcare professionals participated: 644 received immersive virtual reality, or IVR, training and 67 received video-based training. Assignment to the two conditions was not randomized, and the groups were markedly unequal in size.

Following the interventions, participants completed an ad hoc questionnaire covering four areas: safety and learning, usefulness and performance, satisfaction and experience, and usability. Both training modalities received favorable ratings across the questionnaire, with reported values ranging from 8.0 ± 1.8 to 9.6 ± 1. IVR received particularly high assessments for perceived usefulness and performance, with the study’s analysis indicating especially favorable responses among younger professionals and nurses.

However, the hospital and primary care comparisons did not show the same pattern. At the university hospital, video-based training scored significantly higher than IVR in the safety and learning dimension, with a regression coefficient of −2.6 for IVR and a 95% confidence interval of −4.2 to −1.0. Video training also scored higher for satisfaction and experience, with a coefficient of −1.9 and a 95% confidence interval of −3.7 to −0.2.

No significant differences between the modalities were observed in primary care. The setting-specific scores showed lower IVR ratings than video ratings in two hospital domains, while no significant between-format differences emerged in primary care. The study did not randomize participants or establish an objective performance advantage, and the markedly different group sizes limit how confidently the ratings can be compared.

Because the outcomes came from an ad hoc self-report questionnaire, they describe perceived effectiveness, acceptability and usability rather than independently measured skill, workplace safety or patient outcomes. The authors consequently advised cautious interpretation of the non-randomized results.

Subject of Research: Perceived effectiveness and acceptability of immersive virtual reality and video-based PPE training among healthcare professionals

Article Title: Immersive virtual reality versus standard video-based training for personal protective equipment use during the COVID-19 pandemic: a quasi-experimental study of perceived effectiveness and acceptability

Article References: Caro-Benito, C., Jaen, A., Bertran, A., Fargas, D., López-Sánchez, M., Dalmau, D., & Monistrol, O. (2026). Immersive virtual reality versus standard video-based training for personal protective equipment use during the COVID-19 pandemic: a quasi-experimental study of perceived effectiveness and acceptability. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10314-7

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12909-026-10314-7

Keywords: immersive virtual reality, video-based training, personal protective equipment, healthcare education, COVID-19, quasi-experimental study, PPE donning and doffing, usability, healthcare professionals, Immersive, virtual, reality