Impact of virtual reality on clinical and surgical skills training in veterinary Medicine Students: a systematic review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63688/7q76qs50Keywords:
virtual reality, veterinary education, clinical simulation, surgical skills, immersive learningAbstract
Virtual reality has been progressively incorporated into veterinary education as an alternative to strengthen the learning of clinical, surgical and diagnostic skills in controlled environments. The objective of this systematic review was to analyze its impact on veterinary medicine students, considering the types of intervention, areas of application, educational outcomes and methodological limitations. The search was carried out in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar, following the PRISMA 2020 recommendations. We included 15 primary studies published between 2009 and 2025, assessed using a narrative and comparative synthesis. The main applications were concentrated in anatomy, anesthesia, intubation, surgery, laparoscopy, bovine reproduction, public health, immunology, neurology and emergency preparedness. Four studies reported objective improvements in knowledge or performance, five had mixed results or lack of superiority over conventional methods, and six focused mainly on satisfaction, acceptance, or perceived usefulness. According to Kirkpatrick's model, 80.0% of the investigations focused on levels 1 and 2, while none evaluated level 4 clinical outcomes. Virtual reality was more useful as a complement to traditional teaching than as a substitute for supervised practice. Studies with larger samples, adequate comparators, and longitudinal follow-up are required to verify skill retention and transfer.
References
j1. AAVMC Council on Outcomes-Based Veterinary Education. Competency-Based Veterinary Education: CBVE 2.0. Washington, DC: American Association of Veterinary Medical Colleges; 2024. Disponible en: https://www.aavmc.org/resource/competency-based-veterinary-education-cbve-2-0/
2. Choudhary OP, Sarkar R. Animal anatomical teaching models for enhanced veterinary anatomy education and learning. Pak Vet J. 2025;45(3):961-982. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29261/pakvetj/2025.250
3. Knight A. The effectiveness of humane teaching methods in veterinary education. ALTEX. 2007;24(2):91-109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14573/altex.2007.2.91
4. Kolb DA. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1984.
5. Lateef F. Simulation-based learning: just like the real thing. J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2010;3(4):348-352. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-2700.70743
6. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Gordon DL, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2005;27(1):10-28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590500046924
7. Cook DA, Hatala R, Brydges R, Zendejas B, Szostek JH, Wang AT, et al. Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2011;306(9):978-988. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.1234
8. Aghapour M, Bockstahler BA. State of the art and future prospects of virtual and augmented reality in veterinary medicine: a systematic review. Animals (Basel). 2022;12(24):3517. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12243517
9. Braid HR. The use of simulators for teaching practical clinical skills to veterinary students: a review. Altern Lab Anim. 2022;50(3):184-194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02611929221098138
10. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
11. Kirkpatrick DL, Kirkpatrick JD. Evaluating training programs: the four levels. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers; 2006.
12. Keets L, Boscan P, Arakaki L, Schraeder B, Tornatzky C, Vans M, et al. Interactive virtual reality with educational feedback loops to train and assess veterinary students on the use of anesthetic machine. J Vet Med Educ. 2024;51(3):412-420. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme-2022-0140
13. Xu X, Mangina E, Kilroy D, Kumar AHS, Campbell AG. Delaying when all dogs go to heaven: virtual reality canine anatomy education pilot study. En: 2018 IEEE Games, Entertainment, Media Conference; 2018; Galway, Irlanda. IEEE; 2018. p. 1-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/GEM.2018.8516510
14. Yamauchi A, Oshita R, Kudo A, Umezawa M, Shimizu R, Kamo S, et al. Development of a virtual reality simulator for training canine endotracheal intubation technique and evaluation of the educational impacts. Vet J. 2024;307:106203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2024.106203
15. Baillie S, Crossan A, Brewster SA, May SA, Mellor DJ. Evaluating an automated haptic simulator designed for veterinary students to learn bovine rectal palpation. Simul Healthc. 2010;5(5):261-266. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e3181e369bf
16. Hunt JA, Heydenburg M, Anderson SL, Thompson RR. Does virtual reality training improve veterinary students’ first canine surgical performance? Vet Rec. 2020;186(17):562. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.105749
17. Kinnison T, Forrest ND, Frean SP, Baillie S. Teaching bovine abdominal anatomy: use of a haptic simulator. Anat Sci Educ. 2009;2(6):280-285. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.109
18. McCaw K, West A, Duncan C, Frey D, Duerr F. Exploration of immersive virtual reality in teaching veterinary orthopedics. J Vet Med Educ. 2022;49(6):716-720. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme-2021-0009
19. Seguino A, Seguino F, Eleuteri AL, Rhind SM. Development and evaluation of a virtual slaughterhouse simulator for training and educating veterinary students. J Vet Med Educ. 2014;41(3):233-242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.1113-150R
20. Hottmann NM, Fransson BA. Effects of short-course virtual reality or video-box training on basic laparoscopic skills and simulated surgical performance in veterinary students. Vet Surg. 2025;54(5):860-871. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.14201
21. Casado JG, Tarazona R, Cordero H. Implementation of LABSTER virtual lab in immunology for innovative teaching and improved learning in veterinary degree. Front Vet Sci. 2025;12:1603469. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2025.1603469
22. Franzluebbers A, Platt S, Johnsen K. Comparison of command-based vs. reality-based interaction in a veterinary medicine training application. Front Virtual Real. 2020;1:608853. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2020.608853
23. Pereira MM, Schmidt PL, Dyce PW. Using the virtual world of Second Life in veterinary medicine: student and faculty perceptions. J Vet Med Educ. 2018;45(2):148-155. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.1115-184R4
24. Garcia-Ara A, Sandoval Barron E, Seguino A. A survey of students’ learning experience using a virtual slaughterhouse simulator in three UK veterinary schools during COVID-19. Vet Rec. 2023;193(6):e3307. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/vetr.3307
25. Johnson K, Espitia N, Zoran D. Using a multi-user virtual environment to conduct veterinary disaster preparedness training. Virtual Worlds. 2025;4(2):19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/virtualworlds4020019
26. Hadžiomerović N, Čaklovica K, Dučić N, Gjoni Gündemir M, Vejzović A, Fazlović N, et al. Anatomy of meat cuts: integrating 3D scanning and virtual reality in veterinary education and training. Front Vet Sci. 2025;12:1680785. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2025.1680785
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Sara Elizabeth Ramos Briones, Luis Felipe Frías Serrano (Autor/a)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
El artículo se distribuye bajo la Licencia Creative Commons Atribución 4.0 . Salvo que se indique lo contrario, el material publicado asociado se distribuye bajo la misma licencia.
