Virtual reality simulator versus box-trainer to teach minimally invasive procedures: A meta-analysis

Background: To evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality simulator (VRS) training compared to box-trainer training (BT) for learning outcomes in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques. Materials and Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed using CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, LILACS. The primary outcomes were time to perform MIS and performance score in MIS. After being selected, the articles were evaluated for methodological quality and risk of bias. The results were evaluated for quality of evidence and meta-analysis was performed. Results: 20 randomized clinical trials were included in the qualitative analysis and 14 were used in the meta-analysis. VRS training was more efficient than BT training (P < 0.00001, 95% CI: 35.08 to -25.01) when evaluating participant time needed to complete the peg task. In descriptive analysis, VRS training was better than BT training in participant performance score to perform MIS. There was no statistical difference in the meta-analysis in the time needed to perform surgery, time to complete basic or advanced tasks and performance score for basic or advanced tasks. Conclusions: VRS training was better than BT training in participant performance scores when performing MIS and in the time needed to complete the basic task of peg transfer. In all other outcomes, regardless of the student's level of experience or type of activity, the two forms of training were equivalent.