Slashdot Mirror


Med Students Get Training In Second Life Hospitals

Hugh Pickens writes "Discover Magazine reports that although medical simulations have been around for a long time, medical schools like Imperial College London are starting to use virtual hospitals in Second Life so students can learn their way around an O.R. before they enter the real thing. The students can also test their knowledge in the Virtual Respiratory Ward by interviewing patient avatars, ordering tests, diagnosing problems, and recommending treatment. 'The real innovation in SL clinical simulations is that they bring people together in a clinical space — you are standing next to an avatar who is a real patient, and the doctor avatar to your right is a resident at Massachusetts General Hospital and the nurse to your left is at the University of Pennsylvania hospital,' says John Lester, the Education and Healthcare Market Developer at Linden Labs. The most significant benefit of SL training may be the cost. Real-life training facilities require thousands, and sometimes millions of dollars to build and maintain, while SL simulation rooms can be created for minimal costs, and accessed from anywhere in the world for the price of an internet connection. SL can also expose students to situations that a standard academic program can't duplicate: 'You can take risks that aren't safe in the real world and teach more complex subjects in three dimensions,' says Colleen Lin. 'When you're resuscitating a dummy in real life, it looks like a dummy. But you can program an avatar to look like it's choking or having a heart attack, and it looks more real to the student responsible for resuscitating it.'"

126 comments

  1. But I play one on Tv by DarkOx · · Score: 4, Funny

    I am not a doctor but I have trained as on in Second Life.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    1. Re:But I play one on Tv by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      And if you want to become a pathologist, you can always subscribe Second Death.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:But I play one on Tv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Checking for hernias: turn your head and right-click/cough.

    3. Re:But I play one on Tv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I tipped my server, but then the HD started making noises and a cable came loose.

    4. Re:But I play one on Tv by dziban303 · · Score: 1

      People still play Second Life? Maybe they should get, ya know, a First Life.

    5. Re:But I play one on Tv by Larryish · · Score: 1

      SL can also expose students to situations that a standard academic program can't duplicate:

      Like flying penises.

    6. Re:But I play one on Tv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This story has been around for sometime. Discover Magazine sucking it up.

    7. Re:But I play one on Tv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can we all stop buying in to this obvious slashvertisement now?

      2nd Life has been taking desperate stabs at usefulness for a long time now... and the stabs are getting stupider by the month.

    8. Re:But I play one on Tv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not a doctor either. I thought of this around the time PS3 introduced the Home idea. I think this could be useful how would I get involved?
      I love the jokes to lol, utter infancy and hey!

  2. Emergency room cases... by irregular_hero · · Score: 5, Funny

    This should come in handy for doctors trained this way when a blue, eight-foot tall hermaphroditic troll shows up at a hospital emergency room complaining of chest pains.

    1. Re:Emergency room cases... by DaleGlass · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes.

      And when a mad scientist finally creates furries in real life, the doctors will already be familiar with the anatomy.

    2. Re:Emergency room cases... by IcyNeko · · Score: 1

      It's not lupus.

  3. Shockingly sensible by maudface · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Despite being incredibly skeptical of such substitutes for a first life this does seem like a ridiculously good idea for filling such a gap in education given what a leap it must be between classroom knowledge and actually dealing with real world patients.

    I must admit that I'm just utterly amazed that someone's actually thought of a way to use second life that isn't utterly futile and useless.

    1. Re:Shockingly sensible by thedonger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wait a minute...How does a simulation with real doctors, nurses, and patients in real facilities make it cheaper? The patient has to be in a hospital with all those people around, anyway, right?

      Personally, I have never been a fan of simulation. The statement:

      You can take risks that aren't safe in the real world and teach more complex subjects in three dimensions

      doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If we all tried to be like Dr. House on the same-named television show we'd all have many, many dead patients.

      --
      Help fight poverty: Punch a poor person.
    2. Re:Shockingly sensible by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1
      The avatars that are playing patients are responding in real time from a script (using voice chat), the test results come back in real time (minutes to days later) and the monitoring instruments are real time. If Dr. Disaster orders the wrong stuff, his patient may die on him in real time ... and he can fill out the paperwork.

      It's next-best thing to having the virtual reality simulators or actors playing patients.

    3. Re:Shockingly sensible by mikael · · Score: 2, Interesting

      To get the dummies to physically appear to react to the medical conditions that they are simulating requires special effects technology. To simulate the physical behavior in a virtual world just requires some software programming.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    4. Re:Shockingly sensible by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Very realistic dummies (ie other med students) are very easy to come by in the real world.

    5. Re:Shockingly sensible by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Right. Because you never ever see a gaggle of students following a doctor on his rounds, do you?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re:Shockingly sensible by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      It's next-best thing to having the virtual reality simulators or actors playing patients.

      Exactly. So since you still have to have real people behind the avatars responding why on earth settle for the "next best thing" and actually go for the best thing? Its better for training, easier for the actors to participate in. True it does not involve computers so it isn't as "cool" as SL but I can see no pedagogical benefits from using SL.

    7. Re:Shockingly sensible by caramelcarrot · · Score: 1

      Have you seen SL's graphics? It'd make more sense to use a FPS engine if they want something that looks good and runs well, not that piece of shit.

    8. Re:Shockingly sensible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait a minute...How does a simulation with real doctors, nurses, and patients in real facilities make it cheaper?

      The post you replied to made no claims about it being cheaper. Or did you just hijack this thread instead of starting your own, new thread?

    9. Re:Shockingly sensible by greenbird · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Personally, I have never been a fan of simulation.

      You've obviously never been in the military or been trained to deal with stressful, life or death situations. Or at least I hope you haven't. If you have, you need to change professions immediately. Simulations are absolutely critical to such training and the more realistic the better. Simulations can recreate and/or demonstrate the confusion and chaos that reigns in situations like that and helps tremendously in dealing with it when those situations occur for real. Actually simulations and role playing is very helpful in even mundane situations like important business meetings.

      --
      Who is John Galt?
    10. Re:Shockingly sensible by robinesque · · Score: 1

      I believe the program you refer to is title 'House M.D.'

    11. Re:Shockingly sensible by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Thats possible but I thought of a counter example. I have in my inbox two emails from some automated training system for health and safety courses which every employee has to complete. The idea is that the HSE manager has to show that every employee has completed the induction. Everybody gets hassled with emails until they follow a link and click through a set of induction pages. When they get to the end they are marked in a database. HSE obligations are satisfied and nothing is actually learnt.

    12. Re:Shockingly sensible by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      I work in air traffic control and simulation is also an important function of our systems. It works well because the simulator is just the operational system running in a different mode. From the POV of the operator they interact with the system the same way. The most important factor is that the people who run the simulation take it very seriously.

      Once when I was at the pool with my family a woman approached us and said she was going to simulate drowning, and asked us not to get involved. The first aid people were running a sim and I suppose it worked okay but for me it was a bit like the evacuation sims we do at work. In a real fire I would be the first out of the building running right over the bodies of my valued co-workers.

      I have a suspicion that second life simulation may turn into a "tick the box" test. Just get it done. You know the rules and they don't really relate to reality.

    13. Re:Shockingly sensible by greenbird · · Score: 1

      I have a suspicion that second life simulation may turn into a "tick the box" test. Just get it done. You know the rules and they don't really relate to reality.

      Then you need better people running the simulations. When I was in the service I knew the guy who basically ran the game simulations for 5 Corps in Europe. They were running a Corp level miniature simulation with people from 7th Corps playing the OpFor. My friend, who was running the sim noticed the NATO commanders were all keeping their air defense units way too far back from contact. About 20 minutes later a Regiment of Hinds (Soviet attack helicopters) came rolling over a hill and took out about 80% of a NATO Battalion and about 50% of a Regiment ripping a huge gap in the NATO line. It was rather entertaining seeing a bunch of senior officers whining like little kids about how unfair it was. But it taught them hording their air defense units back where they were safe from ground casualties basically eliminated them from operational effectiveness.

      That's what simulations are good for and how they should be run. In the evacuation sims they should lock the exit you're suppose to use. In the SL sims they can throw all kinds of wrenches in the works to keep them both interesting and engaging. There is no set script. Play off the reactions and actions. Pilots in the simulator don't just takeoff turn on the auto-pilot then land. The plane breaks in unexpected ways and things fail mysteriously. The plane starts reacting weird. They encounter weather. The whole point is to experience the unusual conditions to test peoples reactions to them under conditions where people don't die and you can objectively evaluate the performance after.

      I would bet the ATC simulations focus on those type a scenarios. If they don't they need to put someone else in charge of training.

      --
      Who is John Galt?
    14. Re:Shockingly sensible by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute...How does a simulation with real doctors, nurses, and patients in real facilities make it cheaper?

      My first thought was that it gives students a wider range of experiences before beginning their internship, and you don't have to pay to send the students a thousand miles away.

    15. Re:Shockingly sensible by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      To clarify: the ATC simulations are run very professionally. My point was that the success of a simulation generally depends on how seriously it is taken by the managers and participants. At one extreme this medical thing could be like the joke online training courses I sometimes have to do.

    16. Re:Shockingly sensible by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      FPS engines don't support instant dynamic content and instant scriptability for objects while actually being in-world. SL does, and that's why it looks the way it looks. Actual games can get away with preset and fixed content in a level, SL doesn't work that way.

    17. Re:Shockingly sensible by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The engines themselves don't, of course. But it should be trivial to create a program that shows a med ward, create an authoring tool for the trainer to create medical situations on the fly and push the trainees into it. I mean, it's done for games, why can't it be done for more "sensible" applications?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    18. Re:Shockingly sensible by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      To make people take a sim serious, they have to be able to take it serious in the first place. They have to see that there is a benefit in it for them. If it is generally seen as a joke and nuisance (and let's be blunt, that SL sim has a great chance to be seen like that), they will not participate meaningfully.

      An example. I, too, spent some time in the military, with conscripts being a huge part of the sim. It would have been necessary to give them a reason to take it serious, because the way it was done had to end in a disaster. The cardinal sin was to send those that are "dead" back to base and have them sit around for the rest of the sim. Now, you have conscripts facing the choice of being in the mud, being yelled at and having to dig trenches or sit around in a rather well heated place and play cards.

      You never had so many volunteers for suicide missions. And you have never seen people so eager to die for their country. The final straw was, though, when two groups met each other and both sides refused to fire a shot, hoping the other side would mow them down so they could go home. That's when they finally called the whole thing off and realized that this (rather expensive) sim had gone to waste.

      Give people a reason to WANT to take part in your sim, and they will take it serious and see it as a good learning experience. Only if someone can see your sim as something that makes him better (in something he actually WANTS to become better) he will willingly and meaningfully participate.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    19. Re:Shockingly sensible by vertinox · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute...How does a simulation with real doctors, nurses, and patients in real facilities make it cheaper? The patient has to be in a hospital with all those people around, anyway, right?

      IAMAMS (I am not a med studen) but I am indirectly familiar with the process.

      I'm not sure if you are familiar with med school, but the only training most surgeons get before they get to assist with a surgery is of course cadavers.

      Sure its great hands on, but the key problem is that they are dead so any training has no method of letting the student know if he did something horrible wrong other than the instructor looking over their shoulder.

      Secondly you can't simulate conditions or diseases in a cadaver on the fly. I mean if you happen to have one of someone who died of something, that's great, but sometimes its not so convenient all the time.

      With a computer simulation you can simulate a living being with whatever condition you want to train on.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    20. Re:Shockingly sensible by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Not dummies. Actors! In Münster in Germany, there is a nice teaching hospital, that has nothing but actors as patients. The actors can simulate many many things, and they rate the doctors and nurses's behavior, friendliness, etc.

      From a reportage that my brother did, I know that they are very successful. Patients feel much better treated by people coming from this training.

      Of course, operations are not performed on them. ^^ But small things that are done without narcosis can also be simulated with tricks.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  4. Where is the Reset Button? by path0$ · · Score: 3, Funny

    The inevitable dialogue between totally overworked surgeons:

    "Oh well that was his liver I just cut open not the stomach... let's reset this"

    *awkward silence*

    "Wait... Oh shit, well let's just tell his family there were some... unexpected complications right?"

    --
    What the Hell?
  5. Second Shit by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Good god. I hope I never get sick in London.

  6. I can just see what will happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can just see it now.

    Doctor: My god, the patient's heart is lagging!

    Nurse: Doctor! What are you talking about?! He's going into cardiac arrest!

    Doctor: Nurse, check the Monster (tm) power cable on the heart rate monitor. I think I got the electron directionality device wrong.

    Nurse: He needs to be defibrillated! Hurry!

    Doctor: Screw that! I'm not going to pay a micro-transaction fee for such a crappy add-on!

    Machine: beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep

  7. Great! by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Funny

    So now when I feel sick I go to a SL hospital and have a real doc diagnose me.

    "That chest pain you describe, is it burning? Yes... And it radiates into your left arm... ok... Say, do you feel dizzy or have a strange taste in your mouth? Hello? ... HELLO? Still there?"

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Great! by Seumas · · Score: 1

      I would definitely want to know if this was part of the training for any medical professional that tended to me so that I could leave and find someone else.

    2. Re:Great! by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      I would definitely want to know if this was part of the training for any medical professional that tended to me so that I could leave and find someone else.

      Why? Would you refuse to have CPR from someone who had trained on dummies because, you know, dummies aren't people? What is it about the idea of having virtual-world computer training as part of a complete medical curriculum that bothers people so much?

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this is more about finding a reason for Second Life to exist, than something to help doctors.

    4. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Much like playing Call of Duty doesn't make you a real life marksman, clicking a mouse doesn't give you the same muscle memory experience as with a dummy.

    5. Re:Great! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      No. You go there with imaginary diseases. ^^

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  8. Great for hype, not great for teaching by BlueBoxSW.com · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Having seen several second life simulators/training sessions, I have to keep asking "Why?"

    The benefit is that it is semi-standard and semi-cheap to do, and connects people easily.

    But, the effort to create something useful for teaching is great. The benefits are minimal. The controls are frustrating and resemble nothing in real life.

    If you really want to teach something well, you're better off creating your own instructional design and simulation. 3-D tools are cheap now.

    1. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      "Anne, Anne - are you all right?".

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by Kreigaffe · · Score: 1

      Because Linden has one hell of a PR machine, basically. Throw futuristic buzzwords in, sprinkle liberally with perverts and furries and flying dongs.. you're left with a lot of people writing for a lot of business and trade mags about how next-gen SL is, how that sort of interaction is the future of (insert legit subject here), and vigorously defending those viewpoints so nobody suspects they actually are perverts or furries or flying dongs. We all know they actually are, though.

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    3. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by finity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree. I've seen one or two of these things before and it usually seems like it'll turn into more of a social playground than a training environment.

      I can understand how this might allow med students to practice diagnosing something, but the OPs point about it being more valuable than resuscitating a dummy in real life seems way off. They will never be able to teach something that requires a specific physical action in a simulated world. For instance, you have to actually practice CPR on something that resembles a human in order to truly understand how to do CPR. You have to actually practice placing the defibrillator paddles on a human form, you can't just right click and select "defibrillate."

      Now maybe if we had a Matrix-style brain jack...

    4. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by DaleGlass · · Score: 1

      I don't think you've actually been in SL recently, or at all.

      I mean, "flying dongs", come on. That was pretty much of a one time trolling event, and not nothing normal, but roughly equivalent to people posting ASCII art of goatse on slashdot. I've only actually seen it on youtube and never seen it in person, despite logging in almost every day for 3 years.

    5. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 1

      I think you're the one who hasn't been in SL for a while. It is still rampant with flying dongs, facehumping creatures, and 6-foot fox-like creatures with strap-ons. Fortunately, there are easy controls to stop that from happening if you shell out the $300/month plus upfront costs to get your own chunk of land. My worry is that despite being user-designed and 3-d Second Life is nothing like the real world. Much like any chatroom or forum, people on SL will say or do anything without fear of repercussions because of the anonymity afforded them. A sad truth which is one of the major hurdles Linden Labs will face in trying to market SL as a serious environment.

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    6. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by DaleGlass · · Score: 1

      Like I said, I've been in SL for about 3 years, logging in mostly every day. I mostly hang out in Luskwood.

      We've got a large staff of moderators (of which I'm one) that ensure we don't have "flying dongs" (never seen one actually), or "6-foot fox-like creatures with strap-ons" (actually I am a 6 foot fox-like creature, but it's a PG area, so we don't allow strap-ons or anything of the sort).

      I've not found it necessary to pay for my own sim. Decent places in SL can be found if you look around a bit. It's just like IRC channels, web forums, or anything else. Many of those are full of annoying people, but there are plenty well managed ones.

      My worry is that despite being user-designed and 3-d Second Life is nothing like the real world.

      That SL is not RL is kind of the point of it, IMO.

      Much like any chatroom or forum, people on SL will say or do anything without fear of repercussions because of the anonymity afforded them

      Are you hanging out on /b or something?

      There are plenty chats and web forums where there are repercusions, that being that people get banned when they go over the line. If you joined one where the owners don't care about what's going on, then that's your problem.

    7. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I can understand how this might allow med students to practice diagnosing something, but the OPs point about it being more valuable than resuscitating a dummy in real life seems way off. They will never be able to teach something that requires a specific physical action in a simulated world. For instance, you have to actually practice CPR on something that resembles a human in order to truly understand how to do CPR. You have to actually practice placing the defibrillator paddles on a human form, you can't just right click and select "defibrillate."

      You are thinking like an organic mechanic. Very few doctors do a large amount of resuscitating and defibrillating patients. They need practice in interviewing skills to get diagnoses, which SL can give them. Getting a good patient history, and correctly interpreting it, means the difference between successfully treating the patient and not.

      They need practice ordering lab tests and interpreting the results, ordering the right test, not pissing off the lab techs, not expecting TV medi-drama speed on the tests.

      The hospitals can run the SL experience with ZERO investment into 3D equipment, and without taking up RL space in the hospital. I've participated in RL tyraining for interns and med students, and getting everyone into the same place at the same time is difficult. With SL, the "patient" can be in Cleveland and the med student in Detroit.

    8. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by waitd · · Score: 1

      Actualy Lindon has gone even futher in the last week to keep you safe from the flying dongs, facehumping creatures, and 6-foot fox-like creatures with strap-ons. They have been segrated to there own continent and you have to be age verified to even go there. So if you dont want it you wont see it. If you wanna see it, it is all cramed together now!!! ROCK ON.

    9. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by BlueBoxSW.com · · Score: 1

      However, I am really excited that doctors of the future will have greater computer literacy.

      The majority of doctors today work on paper and refuse to have anything to do with computers.

      This is a huge drag on our medical system, and reminds me of stories where NASA scientists refused to use computers because they liked doing calculations by hand.

      It wasn't until their hands were forced or the old guard retired that they could see the opportunities computers opened up.

      The medical record of the future will not just be a digital repository for information, if will be a self contained healthcare expert system that will try to anticipate issues and provide interactive assistance and diagnosis.

    10. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The majority of doctors today work on paper and refuse to have anything to do with computers.

      Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've created. The ability to bankrupt a country is nothing compared to force of a thousand poorly written systems, implemented by representatives of Satan all integrated by the lowest bidder.

      The majority of doctors today would like to work with an electronic medical record that didn't suck donkey balls, take more time than evolution and cost more than a Larry Ellison's yacht. I'm not sure just exactly who's fault it is that most EMRs are just this side of awful, but since it's Sunday morning, I'll blame Dick Cheney.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    11. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by sunwolf · · Score: 1

      Wait until MS releases a SL clone with Natal built in.

      Then you'll see the benefits.

    12. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by sunwolf · · Score: 1

      Just wait until MS releases a SL clone with Project Natal built-in. Then the simulation scene will get much more interesting.

    13. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by Kreigaffe · · Score: 1

      Mkay, so you fall under the furry-trumpeting-the-praises-of-SL category, then. You wouldn't happen to be the guy with the fox-headed avatar I've seen pictures of in business mags?

      The only reason I rant against SL is because it's constantly paraded around as something it's not.

      It's a social sandbox. Period end of story. There's nothing WRONG with a social sandbox, but after years now of buzz-heavy articles about how it's so next-gen and how it is the future of online interaction and businesses would be foolish not to establish a presence, I'm long since fed up with it all. SL is just a 3D freeform RP chat room. Don't make it out to be more than it is and there's no problem. Case in point, this article: How in the hell is it better training to see a picture of an NPC choking and learn to push "A" to save their life, than it would be to ACTUALLY practice the skills you'd use to save someone's life on a dummy that you can pretend is choking? It's not the choking you need to learn, it's the things you need to do to stop the choking you need to learn. It seems to me this training would be much better accomplished through the use of dummies and a soundstage ER set up in a shed, with the part of the 'realistic victim' being played by actual people (either live or via video clips) with the students making a judgement based on those actors as to what actions need performed on the dummy.
      In short, it's just more hype making SL out to be something that it is not.

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    14. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      well MS could do it a few ways

      1 port SL to the Xbox platform and just use the SL grid
      2 pay SL for a copy of their software and put up a grid of their own

      3 just say FIDO and hand Linden Labs the protohype hardware and the needed SDK

      but then Microsoft does not want to get that "OpenSource" stuff on them

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    15. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by DaleGlass · · Score: 1

      Mkay, so you fall under the furry-trumpeting-the-praises-of-SL category, then. You wouldn't happen to be the guy with the fox-headed avatar I've seen pictures of in business mags?

      Doubtful, unless the fox was blue and wearing a Debian shirt, or futuristic glowing armor.

      I'm mostly involved in scripting and modding the SL viewer. I doubt business mags would find me interesting as I don't do anything business related.

      SL is just a 3D freeform RP chat room. Don't make it out to be more than it is and there's no problem.

      I don't really disagree for the most part, my main objection was to describing SL as a place full of flying dongs. IMO if you're really experiencing that, you're doing something wrong, as there are plenty places in SL that aren't like that. It's just like the rest of the internet, there are many places, not all of them are pleasant, but there are enough of them that you can find something that fits.

      I'm not into the whole SL sex thing and like peace and quiet, so I found a place that was like that. I'd say the furriness can be almost considered as an aesthetic preference, as many conversations that happen there have nothing to do with what the people look like.

      Case in point, this article: How in the hell is it better training to see a picture of an NPC choking and learn to push "A" to save their life, than it would be to ACTUALLY practice the skills you'd use to save someone's life on a dummy that you can pretend is choking?

      The way I understand it, a medical dummy that doesn't just lie there, and actually reacts to what's being done to it, and can simulate choking, is a very complicated and expensive thing. SL isn't near as good as that of course, but it's a lot cheaper. SL also allows for a lot more complexity than "push A to save their life". Now, not being in the field, I can't really say whether this is of much use or not. I visited the schizophrenia simulating room and found it interesting though.

      I completely agree that SL has its limitations, but I find it very interesting that people are trying to do things like this. It might not be there yet, but by pushing its limitations we can find what needs to be improved and fix it.

      For instance, Google's office web applications were impossible back when the web consisted of static HTML, frames, and a few CGIs. But people pushed against those limits, came up with ideas to work around them, and made things advance. If nobody tried to do anything that was beyond the original scope of the web, it wouldn't have got better.

    16. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by greenbird · · Score: 1

      You are thinking like an organic mechanic. Very few doctors do a large amount of resuscitating and defibrillating patients. They need practice in interviewing skills to get diagnoses, which SL can give them. Getting a good patient history, and correctly interpreting it, means the difference between successfully treating the patient and not.

      I wish I had mod points. And in dealing with having to make life or death decisions with incomplete or possible even incorrect information. This type of training is far more critical to patient survival that how to do CPR or where to place the defibrillator paddles.

      --
      Who is John Galt?
    17. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      It is still rampant with flying dongs, facehumping creatures, and 6-foot fox-like creatures with strap-ons.

      Pretty much like med school, then?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    18. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by ozbird · · Score: 1

      I agree. I've seen one or two of these things before and it usually seems like it'll turn into more of a social playground than a training environment.

      Many doctors would do well to learn some social skills.

    19. Re:Great for hype, not great for teaching by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      I've been in SL since July 19th of 2006 (yep, it's my Rezday) and I've only seen flying dongs...once....at that one specific incident regarding Anshe Chung.

  9. There is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No substitute for real patients.

    However, few real patients are willing to be a guinea pig. It's the great impasse in medical sciences. Since I trained in the third world, I had no shortage of desperate patients in a society where litigation is virtually impossible. So I would consider my years of "hands on" experience much more valuable than someone who has spent the same hours with some form of virtual patient. But then again in "developed" countries, the threat of litigation is very serious. So it's kind of ironic - the country with the greatest punishment for "untrained" doctors produces the least trained doctors...

    The example is in England, but the most litigious country is the US. And everyone knows US doctors are TERRIBLE clinicians. Oh they are really good at theory. But take away the expensive diagnostic equipment and lab tests, and they become useless in the field. This in part explains the disproportionally high cost of health care in the US.

    1. Re:There is by glueball · · Score: 1

      I guess not all of us are as fortunate as you to have the flexibility of disposable, forgettable patients and still yet call the outcome of such experience enlightening.


      But take away the expensive diagnostic equipment and lab tests, and they become useless in the field.

      You're right. We should skip the MR and go right to exploratory surgery.

      Oh, one other thing. In my wife's oncology practice, there are many people willing to have a run of trial therapy. You may call them a guinea pig, but here in the US we still refer to them with respect and refer to them as a patient and "Mr." or "Mrs."

    2. Re:There is by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You may call them a guinea pig, but here in the US we still refer to them with respect and refer to them as a patient and "Mr." or "Mrs."

      You live in the US but you don't understand what a figure of speech is?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  10. Why not just train at a real hospital? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Aren't there plenty of hospitals and patients in the world? Isn't that the point of university-hospitals?

  11. Of course... by FlyingSquidStudios · · Score: 1

    You can't actually start the surgery until the OR walls load or it just isn't sterile.

  12. Tactile? by Arrawa · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When I go to my physician, he asks me questions, and feels and presses around the area I have pains to make a diagnoses. How on earth can a doctor in SL make a good diagnoses when he's not able to touch the patient?

    1. Re:Tactile? by DaleGlass · · Score: 3, Informative

      RTFA, or at least the submission.

      Nobody is talking about diagnosing patients on SL. They're talking about using for training, of the sort that's currently being performed on dummies. The supposed advantage is that in SL you can make a dummy that reacts to things being done to it much cheaper than a real one, which would need to have some fancy robotics installed into it.

      I don't know if this is actually helpful or not, but it's got nothing to do with diagnosing people through SL.

    2. Re:Tactile? by evilbessie · · Score: 1

      Well the last time I saw what they were doing at Imperial with second life it was just videos and a pointless copy of the actual buildings in the college. It all seemed rather excessive and unnecessary. It is just some doctor with too much research money playing with what they think is cool.

  13. Over in the UK by FastMemFirst · · Score: 2, Funny

    The NHS have found Theme Hospital to be a more accurate simulation.

  14. Looks, sounds, but needs touch... by CFBMoo1 · · Score: 1

    They should add some kind of gloves with the goggles that lets students feel around the operating room as well as see it. That would make this really cool. Sadly the article indicates this is more of a point and click type interface. Who knows, the extra demand for touch gloves like that would make them cheap and wide spread more.

    --
    ~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
  15. Solobuonumore by pres211982 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I like to read and I like the books. I read of all since the detective novels with the serious works. I preserve the majority of my books because I like to read again those which teach me something. To explore the world of the books is as exciting for me as to explore our small planet. It is a question of temperament; there are people who hate to travel out of their familiar environment and others that the known one annoys. For the latter, the discovery of new ideas in books or the Internet is still another aspect of the great adventure of the life. Solobuonumore

  16. Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by CorporalKlinger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm currently a 4th year medical student and can tell you from personal experience that nothing... absolutely nothing... can replace face-to-face training with real-life patients. SecondLife is a fun playground, but it's not a place to learn to practice the art of medicine or the scientific basis for diagnosing disease. Talking to virtual avatars or playing in a virtual OR is nothing like real life. For instance, in a real-life OR, you must vigorously scrub your hands for 2-3 minutes with special cleanser before you're clean to "gown up." When you're standing around waiting for the procedure to start, you have to have your hands crossed in front of you in a special position to avoid touching anything that isn't sterile, including your own face, sides of your gown, etc. Good luck reproducing these intricate details in Second Life.

    Virtually every medical school in the US has a "patient simulator" laboratory where mechanical / robotic dummies are used to train future physicians. These labs also host "simulated patients," - actors, usually from the community, who are trained to play the part of a patient with a specific disease. It isn't cheap for schools to do this, but it's a lot more realistic to perform your first vaginal exam or rectal exam on a real person than in a SecondLife virtual world. Same goes for performing other aspects of the physical exam. How is a student to put their stethescope to the patient's chest, carotid arteries, abdomen, or back in order to arrive at a diagnosis when there is no mechanism to do so in SecondLife? These are things that must be experienced to learn.

    If you want to learn to be a doctor - go to a real medical school, interact with both real and trained patients in real life, and learn the intricacies of the art of talking to a patient, sharing your compassion with them, and working through their problems or concerns under real conditions. When a patient with depression and suicidal ideation shows up to the Emergency Department and there are 13 other patients waiting to be seen, I have to make a decision about how much time I'll spend with them. Do I talk them through their concerns? Do I let Social Work handle it? Do I call for a psychiatry consult? Doing these things in second life are easy and have few repercussions. Calling for a psych consult at 3:00 AM on a Tuesday for simple SI and depression will get my head ripped off by the poor psychiatrist who has to come in to do what I should have been able to do myself.

    All this will do is build barriers and put "blinders" onto future physicians. "It couldn't have been a heart attack - he didn't have left sided chest pain radiating to the arm and jaw. He had no shortness of breath! That's how I was taught MI's all present in Second Life!" Med schools need to stop cutting corners and trying to implement these ridiculous ways of trying to be "cutting edge." Want to be cutting edge? Implement a computerized medical record system that actually works - for starters - and institute a system by which patients evaluate their physicians in a publicly available forum so that we can see which docs should be doctors... and which shouldn't. That would do more for patient care than any of this Second Life nonsense.

    1. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      I'm currently a 4th year medical student and can tell you from personal experience that nothing... absolutely nothing... can replace face-to-face training with real-life patients.

      Nobody is talking about replacing face to face training; they're talking about replacing a certain amount of the dummy training with this virtual training. Ask the military sometime whether virtual training is effective.

      All this will do is build barriers and put "blinders" onto future physicians.

      Dummy training is dependent on a competent physician and educator administering such every time. Virtual training is not. Dummy training can only cover situations understood by the administrator. Virtual training can cover situations understood by anyone consulted for the program content.

      Want to be cutting edge? Implement a computerized medical record system that actually works - for starters - and institute a system by which patients evaluate their physicians in a publicly available forum so that we can see which docs should be doctors... and which shouldn't.

      There already is a computerized medical record system which would actually work. It's called just giving me the digital records so I can put them on a flash drive. I can be responsible for my own records.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by maxume · · Score: 1

      Is it a little uncomfortable performing a vaginal or rectal exam when you know the 'patient' is a paid actor who volunteered to undergo the procedure?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I agree that simulations cannot replace real world interaction, aren't you forgetting one very important aspect of simulations? You can record, "play-back" and analyze a scenario as many times as you want, from different viewpoints, etc. You can, make see-through animations showing the mechanics of procedures inside the human bodies, etc., before you actually get to try these in reality. You can hide/show human body anatomy layers or systems. Good luck doing the same with camera recordings of actors or real patients. I find this intubation procedure video quite instructional:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRkleyIJi9U

      An interactive version of it would be even better don't you think?

      I wish I had such possiblities while in medschool.

    4. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Virtually every medical school in the US has a "patient simulator" laboratory where mechanical / robotic dummies are used to train future physicians. These labs also host "simulated patients," - actors, usually from the community, who are trained to play the part of a patient with a specific disease.

      "Student #1: And are you experiencing any discomfort?

      Kramer: Just a little burning during urination.

      Student #1: Okay, any other pain?

      Kramer: The haunting memories of lost love."

    5. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Amazing. Did you even read the summary, to say nothing of the article? No one, no one, is talking about replacing hands-on training with Second Life. It's a preparation. A supplement. A place to play with scenarios that you can't easily replicate with actors, and to give colleagues from widely separated geographical locations a way to work together at least to some degree.

      Me, I'm a veteran military medic and civilian EMT with ten years of experience in emergency medicine, so I hope, almost-doctor, that you'll take a little advice from an old soldier. The more you train, the better you will do when you face the real thing. Now, it is entirely true that no training of any kind will ever replace the real thing. Doing CPR on a dummy isn't like doing it on a real person at three in the morning in a rainy alley. Reading a cardiac monitor trace in a classroom isn't the same as doing it under pressure in an ER with people screaming at you. Putting an IV needle in your classmates is a hell of a lot easier than hunting for a vein in someone who's nearly bled out, where you only get one shot and if you don't get the patient's fluid volume up in five minutes he'll die. But you have to practice these skills, over and over again, to the point where your hands and eyes know what to do even when your brain forgets.

      If you haven't learned this lesson yet, believe me, in residency you will.

      And personally, I would have loved to have this kind of simulation around when I was training. It would have been very helpful in helping people get their heads around the intricacies of emergency medicine operations. Not so much the actual hands-on procedures (although there's some interesting simulation work going on in that area too) but navigating the controlled chaos of an emergency scene or busy ER. Would it have been a substitute for live training, or for the experience of the real thing? Of course not. But it would have been a fine place to start. The more training you do, and the more different kinds of training you do, the better you will handle it when someone's life is literally in your hands.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    6. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by greenbird · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you want to learn to be a doctor - go to a real medical school, interact with both real and trained patients in real life, and learn the intricacies of the art of talking to a patient, sharing your compassion with them, and working through their problems or concerns under real conditions. When a patient with depression and suicidal ideation shows up to the Emergency Department and there are 13 other patients waiting to be seen, I have to make a decision about how much time I'll spend with them. Do I talk them through their concerns? Do I let Social Work handle it? Do I call for a psychiatry consult? Doing these things in second life are easy and have few repercussions. Calling for a psych consult at 3:00 AM on a Tuesday for simple SI and depression will get my head ripped off by the poor psychiatrist who has to come in to do what I should have been able to do myself.

      Your reasoning supports the premise rather than opposing it. This type of simulation allows you to encounter 1000's of such situations cheaply and quickly under conditions where no one is going to die when you screw the pooch completely. It allows for you and others to go back and much more objectively evaluate your performance without the emotion of knowing that your wrong actions just killed someone. It allows you to store in your brain a much greater range of scenarios and situations. No one is saying eliminate face-to-face training with real-life patients. Simulation allows you to be better prepared and to augment such training. It allows for much greater scope of training since face-to-face training with real-life patients is both much more expensive and much more risky. Would it be better for you to perform open heart surgery the first time on a simulator or actually slicing up a (hopefully) live patients heart? Wouldn't it be much better on a simulator where you can encounter a broad range of complications and critical situations where the patients life isn't at risk?

      --
      Who is John Galt?
    7. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by that+IT+girl · · Score: 1

      This is just *part* of a complete program. I think the next step would be taking this idea in its own direction and creating a dedicated simulation program just for medical training purposes. Written just for one specific use, it could have all the 'intricate details' you mention--including taking off points if they don't cross their hands in the correct position, and etc.

      Does this take the place of any other type of training? Absolutely not. But supplementing what they already do with this can only help. I'd be interested to watch and see if this improves the number of accidental or negligent deaths in hospitals.

      --
      10 FILL MUG WITH COFFEE
      20 DRINK COFFEE
      30 GOTO 10
    8. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by fishbowl · · Score: 2, Informative

      >I'm currently a 4th year medical student and can tell you from personal experience that nothing... absolutely nothing... can replace face-to-face training
      >with real-life patients.

      Of course not. Do you think that claim is on the table? Do you have anything against supplemental information?

      I think a virtual training room could help with USMLE STEP or OSCE preparedness, don't you?

      The "virtual patients" are not automata, they are merely a communication medium for the same standardized patients you get in your CBI's as an MS1/MS2.

      As a 4th year student, have you already forgotten what that experience was like? MS2's are grateful for *any* resource. By the time you get used to the CBI routine, they take it away from you, just like the way they take away the cadavers pretty much as soon as you get used to them, whoops, that's the end of anatomy.

      That said, I don't think the Linden world offers a good way to simulate fine-grained interaction with the world. It's essentially a text chat client augmented with flash video and voice chat. If you don't think flash video is an appropriate tool to supplement medical education, I won't argue, but you're at odds with the state of affairs in medical colleges today, where stuff like video and powerpoint presentations and podcasts are quite prevalent.
      There's nothing wrong with putting an interactive layer on top of that.

      I don't know where you got the idea that anyone was trying to replace med school with Second Life...

      As an MS4, you really don't have time to be thinking about stuff like this. Get to work, silly.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    9. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      There are tons of comments here from people who have never set foot in a medical college, have never had a spouse or a child who has been a medical student, and for sure has never been a medical student him or herself.

      You really have no idea what medical school is like. It's not like other professional schools, in too many ways to list, and it's completely unlike grad school. The experience is unique. Trust me, the students, especially the 2nd years, will appreciate any tool that helps them through some of the incredibly difficult hurdles they face during that part of the career.

      I think most people would be amazed at how much material has to be learned in the first two years of medical school, and appalled at the depth of the testing.

      And whenever you've got patient contact during those years, it's being evaluated, and there's never enough. You don't get to practice. You're *on* every time, even with the standardized ("fake") patients you treat. Basically you're being tested *every time*. And then, the minute school is out, you're probably working all summer in a clinical situation where you're doctoring. Yes, you're a second-year med student or whatever, but in whatever rural health clinic you're working in, you look like a doctor, you act like a doctor, and as far as the patients are concerned, you are one. You almost never "practice" for this. Your feet are in the fire from day one, and you have to function at a level that lots of intelligent and driven people really don't have the aptitude for. (This is a harsh reality that causes a frightening number of med students to either drop out or have total breakdowns and then drop out.)

      I know I would never survive in the med school environment. Someone very close to me is thriving in it.

      Anyway, the jabs against this idea seem to come from the fact that it's the Linden platform being used, and I started reading the comments because I knew there'd be funny remarks driven by an understanding of how stupid SL players can be and the stupid things they build and the attitudes some of them take, but a controlled sim with a purpose can be a really great tool for things like this.

      Even if all there was in the sim, was an avatar where a standardized patient can describe different kinds of rashes, maybe with flash video to show details that are hard to put on avatar skin textures, it's useful. You can work in a pedi clinic for years and not see every kind of rash... And yes, that's pretty much the daily grind in a pedi clinic. Identifying one rash after the next after the next. Cures many of the notion that they want to be a pediatrician, early on...

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    10. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uncomfortable?? What do you mean? I was going to ask where do I sign up for these exams as a patient? I feel a strange anal itching.

    11. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by Vernes · · Score: 1

      I guess you must REALLY hate computer simulations.
      "ZOMG, this is a 2 dimentional picture! Real patients are not 2 dimentional! LOOK! when I cut him here I just get a GAME OVER on my screen".

      Interactive tutorials and demonstrations don't bleed so those are useless as well.

      But in your defense, reading your opinion what you think is and is not possible in Second Life indicated to me that you have no idea what you can do in SecondLife.

      How could you possibly offer a correct opinion if your insight on the subject is incomplete?

      I'd create organs from sculptured prims, linked into one object (max amount of prims in one object is 256) and design a protocol to have the organs communicate with eachother via llMessageLinked. Specific actions preformed on a certain organ would be done by adding the touch or touch_end event scripted in a specific organ.
      Depending on what action was preformed, internal actions would be executed and if needed, communicated to other organs to create complecated action/reaction responses.
      An incission into a beating heart would have that organ broadcast to all the other organs that the bloodpressure is dropping at a certain speed. Every organ would calculate for itself at what point it would start to fail as well.
      At a certain bloodpressure the kidneys would start to fail and liver, and the brain as well.
      If left bleeding too long, the simulation would inform the surgeon that the brain was left without bloodflow too long and the patient never woke up despite a succesful removal of a growth of whatever.
      Should you want MORE then 256 organs in the simulation, we could set up a message relay design, where we use a relay node to whisper the received llMessageLinked messages to the next link_set of prims/organs.
      You could keep adding scenarios to the different organs, and broadcast which scenarios should be en/dis-abled.

      And this is just the simulated body itself. We could monitor all the preperation actions of the user. Bringing home the importance of following procedures.
      FAILURE! You entered the OR without correctly following the 'Gown Up' sequence.


      'Second Life nonsens'.. bahaha.
      It's like saying 'C++ nonsens'.
      It's nonsense if you design it to be nonsens.

      I kinda like making no-nonsens in LSL.

    12. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by CorporalKlinger · · Score: 1

      Would it be better for you to perform open heart surgery the first time on a simulator or actually slicing up a (hopefully) live patients heart? Wouldn't it be much better on a simulator where you can encounter a broad range of complications and critical situations where the patients life isn't at risk?

      1. Medical students do not perform "open heart surgery." Interventional cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons, who do perform surgery on the heart, have at a minimum 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, 5 years of supervised residency training (where they are required to complete a large number of cases under the supervision - in the OR - of attending physicians who have years of experience in the field), and a year or two of specialized fellowship training. No. A simulator is not what I want the surgeon working on my heart to be trained on. I want him to have thousands of past surgeries on real people - both observed and performed under supervision - before he is allowed to fly solo and operate on me.

      2. No simulator created in second life or any other "virtual realm" can accurately reproduce the complexity encountered in operating room or emergency situations.

      3. If, as the article says, the idea is to teach students interviewing and diagnostic skills, they're doing this with both hands tied behind their backs: the basis of medical diagnosis is a thorough history and physical. The history is usually obtained through discussion with the patient... much of what is communicated is non-verbal and cannot be represented in Second Life. In fact, some studies estimate that more than half of human communication in a healthcare setting is communicated non-verbally. In addition, without the ability to actually touch the patient, listen to their heart, their lungs, palpate their abdomen or a wounded extremity or injured joint, their is no furtherance of physical diagnosis skills.

      In short, this program is useless nonsense intended to capture media attention. It implies that the art and science of medicine can be simplified to the extent that all we need are computer simulations for people to become physicians. I can't wait until I hear about the daytime TV advertisements: "Stuck in a dead end job, need more money? Become a doctor - online! - in just 6 to 8 months through Kaplan College or University of Phoenix online! We'll teach you all you need to know through our SecondLife patient simulation system!"

      You're welcome to see a doctor trained with these tools. I prefer a doctor who knows how to interact with real human beings in real situations and who has taken the time to read the books, perform the self-examinations, and complete the continuing medical education training necessary to be prepared "for [a] much greater scope of training." If you don't know enough of the science to be safe in real life - even as a third year medical student (when most schools permit their students to see patients full time) - and you need additional training in SecondLife to supplement your skills and keep you safe, I postulate that your medical school has failed in properly educating you... and they should lose their accreditation.

      Lastly, I don't know what you think goes on in medical school, but there is rarely a situation in which real-life patient contact is either expensive or risky. Seeing a patient in the ER with chest pain... I know enough to get the attending... the nurses know enough to get the attending if I'm too dumb to do so... the unit secretary even knows enough to get the attending if both the nurses and I fail to pick up on something (and the secretaries usually have just a high school diploma). Risky situations tend to come later on - in residency. By that point, one would hope you've had enough real-life training under the close guidance and supervision of licensed physicians to be competent enough to know when to ask for help and admit you're in over your head. Then again, if you got your medical school training in SecondLife... who knows how you'll do.

    13. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by CorporalKlinger · · Score: 1

      I hope if I have the misfortune of requiring the services of EMS, you are not the individual dispatched to respond to my emergency. If you believe SecondLife has any place in the training of physicians, you obviously haven't used the simulation. Walking around in a virtual world "chatting" with patients will teach an individual nothing. If anything, it will harm students by dumbing down the medical environment to the point where the consequences of actions appear cartoon-like and unrealistic. As you astutely pointed out, there's nothing quite like performing chest compressions on a dying human being (I've had the misfortune of doing it many times in my brief medical school career). SecondLife cannot duplicate that. Hunting for a vein on someone who is bleeding out... where is SecondLife's simulation for that? Instead, it's designed to help students interview patients and diagnose diseases based on a set of prompts. Most patients don't present with those textbook symptoms. You're missing the entire category of physical diagnosis, too - no stethescope, no palpation. Heck, you can't even tell if the patient's pupils are dilated or their skin is dusky, clammy, cool, or hot. The body language, if any utilized, is exaggerated and unrealistic. The interview is carried out how... microphone and headset? While you look at a cartoon avatar on your computer screen. So much for realism. What's the point? To waste students' time and drum up publicity.

      I'm tired of the publicity stunts. Medical education works. And for the record, I'm not surprised by your attitude. Virtually every EMT I've spoken with thinks they're God's gift to medicine; humility is not in your ride along duffel bag, I guess. Your experience riding around in an ambulance transporting grandma to her dialysis clinic every MWF, interspersed with the occasional "true" emergency makes you super-qualified to talk about in-hospital training... particularly in-OR training, which was specifically mentioned in the summary as a feature of this simulation.

    14. Re:Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your response is exactly what's wrong with the medical field. Rather than look at a useful tool that's used in pretty much every other profession that requires making life or death decisions you dismiss it out of hand as useless for your profession.

      You know what? Simulation comes even farther from accurately representing the madness of combat. Yet simulation is an absolutely vital part of military training. It's a vital part a flight training. It's a vital part ATC training. But of course you being a know it all doctor who is FAR more intelligent than anyone else, you know this isn't applicable to anything a doctor may have to do. I really hope you change professions but I'm guessing you won't because the medical profession seems to attract a majority of people with attitudes like yours.

      Book learning and science are all important parts of the training. But they don't in any way prepare one for what can happen in the field. Assisting or even performing a supervised procedure doesn't prepare one for being in the position where they are final authority for making decisions. This especially becomes apparent in stressful life or death situations. Simulation at least can provide some brain memory of having gone through the situations or similar ones allowing for more informed and rational thought processes.

      You don't even see the contradictions in what you say in this post. Doctors do no training where they are the final arbitrator in a situation until they place into the situation of being the final arbitrator. But according to you that's ok because they've had all kinds of real life training. Do you see the contradiction there? No, simulation isn't a real life analog. But at least puts them into the situation where they are the final arbitrator.

      You know after writing all that, I sit here and think how useless it all is. I know you're going to dismiss this out of hand because your a doctor and no one can possible know anything useful about your profession without also being a doctor. And it seems the only people they let be doctors are people with that attitude. Just think about this:

      Simulation is used as a vital training tool in every other profession where dangerous and or life or death decisions have to be made. But it seems it is dismissed out of hand as useless by the medical profession.

  17. Stupid Idea is Stupid by CuteSteveJobs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is another silly case of using something not because it's well suited, but simply because it is there. A conversation with an avatar? A "Professor" reading a script? How crazy is that? Think about how different that is from a RL consultation where the doctor has to *look at* and *listen to* the patient. Why not act those in RL? The same with making a virtual OR when they could just show them a real one.

    Take this quote: 'You can take risks that aren't safe in the real world and teach more complex subjects in three dimensions.' Hey, RL *is* 3D. SL is a poor 2D imitation. A medical dummy *is* 3D. SL is not.

    But what's really silly about all this is the PR this is generating for a really dumb idea, when they deserved to be slapped around. All you need to do is find a ridiculous way to work Twitter/YouTube/Facebook into your press release and you'll get widespread coverage.

    Check this book by Jerome Groopman called "How Doctors Think". He describes how doctors *should* give consultations. This SL idea is going to teach med students some really bad habits. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8892053

    1. Re:Stupid Idea is Stupid by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      This is another silly case of using something not because it's well suited, but simply because it is there. A conversation with an avatar? A "Professor" reading a script? How crazy is that? Think about how different that is from a RL consultation where the doctor has to *look at* and *listen to* the patient. Why not act those in RL? The same with making a virtual OR when they could just show them a real one.

      Thinking back on one of my recent encounters with the medical profession (a dentist visit to diagnose a persistent toothache), SecondLife would have been nearly perfect for training the dentist for this. With the exception of the visual examination of the affected tooth, the interview and diagnostic tests (tap test, cold test, x-ray) could have been simulated just fine using a combination of SecondLife's voice chat and image support.

      (Now, the assistant's job would have needed a real patient to practice on. How do you do an x-ray when the tooth normally used to hold the film in place is the one that hurts?)

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
  18. Interesting step in future health care by Jeff+Archambeault · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's interesting that folks are looking into the possibilities. Perhaps it will find itself useful for training and in other different ways.

    One idea came to mind:

    Health care is a hot topic in the US. I'm old enough to remember family doctors making house calls, in the late 60's and very early 70's, in my home town in upstate NY. Judging by the lack of local medical help in the rural town where I am now, there aren't enough doctors to go around. Some towns have sponsored (new?) doctors, paying their education bill, providing facilities, a place to live, and other basic necessities.

    Suppose more communities did this, creating a larger market for doctors. Such virtualization tools could enable doctors to make house calls again, and even give them some side income. Doctors could "see" patients via SL, perhaps for $L, during slow times between RL, local patients.

    Develop an inexpensive USB dongle that can measure pulse, BP, temp, etc, and distribute them widely and with a lifetime guarantee. Have it capable of storing medical records for a family.

    There will be privacy issues, the storage and sharing of medical records, proxies, filters, and trust, but those are things that will need to be dealt with for any "Health Care Reform" to happen. No more filling out paperwork while in the waiting room, but the internet has a great "magazine rack".

    --

    Plus ca change, plus c'est les memes choses.

    1. Re:Interesting step in future health care by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      It's interesting that folks are looking into the possibilities. Perhaps it will find itself useful for training and in other different ways.

      Yep - while Slashdot, supposedly the home of the forward looking geek and nerd, spend their time (once again) pointing and laughing.

  19. I don't think so. by khasim · · Score: 1

    The avatars look nothing like real humans. This would be more like a "choose your own adventure" game.

    Do you have a cough?
    Yes.
    Is it dry, whooping, etc, etc, etc ... ?

    I had pneumonia two years ago. When I went to the doctor he had one of their interns come in so she could listen to what early pneumonia sounded like in different parts of the chest and whether I was inhaling or exhaling.

    This sounds more like trying to train marksmanship with Halo. The game interface is completely different from what you'll encounter in real life.

    1. Re:I don't think so. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something I just randomly found, but this is the average now days http://nwn.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/01/15/wlheader.jpg

  20. Comedy. Gold. by cpu_fusion · · Score: 1

    You win the Internets!

  21. Resuscitating Dummies by mindbrane · · Score: 1
    'When you're resuscitating a dummy in real life, it looks like a dummy.'

    I say just let the dummies die. There's far too many of them walking around as it is.

    --
    ideopath @ play
  22. Training for future doctors and vets. by Doug52392 · · Score: 1

    This program offers training to future doctors and veterinarians at the same time. After all, where else could you go to find half-human half-animal anthropomorphic avatars wandering around?

  23. Two Sides to the Coin by Alurian · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I find it curious that the reactions to this idea are both so sceptical and so negative. I'm not unbiased in my point of view but I do think I have a bit of objectivity gifted to me from being able to see both sides of the story here. Allow me to explain.

    I'm not a nursing student nor am I a nurse, doctor or in fact anyone in the medical profession. I am, however, a third year computing student. Presently myself and my team are creating just one such environment like this, at the University of Tasmania, Australia. We've been working for quite a long time on this project, and we've faced considerable difficulties getting such a project off of the ground, not least because of a mixture of sceptics, confused requirements and because of people who had their heads in the sky thinking we can work wonders with Second Life.

    Now I agree with the previous comment titled 'Creates barriers, doesn't knock them down' by CorporalKlinger, but only insofar as that face-to-face and real life training experiences cannot be replaced by Second Life training environments. There is a lot to be said from this comment - and the real experiences are indeed the most valuable of teaching methods for students in this field.

    The point that is missed in this comment and many others is that the Second Life training environment is not supposed to be taken as a replacement - what is being created here, in both the instance of my own project, as well as (I assume the majority of) other projects of such a nature is a complement to existing training methods.

    Before I continue I want to define what I am talking about when I henceforth use the term 'Simulation': I refer to something attempting to mimic real life in such a way as that it could be practically used in actual real life circumstances. Something taken to be as reality such that training with it would be sufficient to replace training in actuality.

    The bottom line with training in Second Life, from my point of view at the very least, is that it is not a simulation and it is not meant to ever replace face-to-face learning. Anyone who claims that it is supposed to be at the simulation level and anyone who claims it will one day replace existing face-to-face methods of training is either entirely delusional or severely misinformed.

    Any person who spends any amount of time in Second Life will be able to quickly assess that the environment is not one suitable for simulation level training. The controls are fiddly and odd, the world is not always easy to navigate in, there are other people around, unexpected interruptions, lag preventing any sort of decent real-time training and also any simulation level tool worth its weight should not require learning in its own right first, before the simulation can begin. That's a critical design flaw in its own right that prevents Second Life ever reaching into true simulative areas and this is unlikely to be something that ever changes. Short of the most incredible virtual reality programs, 'true' simulation that will replace real life training is at our present state of technology a practical impossibility.

    That ordinary users can identify how problematic Second Life would be as a simulation should already be indicative that developers have taken this into account.

    On the flipside, there are a lot of people out there, people who stand to profit or genuinely interested nurses and doctors, who might try and sell the Second Life hospitals and training environments as simulations of reality. These are dangerous waters, because developers willingly working under people who would sell their Second Life environment as a simulation are producing a dangerous tool that could stand to one day misinform people who hold the lives of others in their hands. This is a powerful point against using Second Life and is probably the underlying point in most negative criticism that I've read.

    Despite the risks and scepticism involved, the benefits of using Second Life in this way (when the way it is to be used is very clearly defi

    --
    A sheathed sword is a sword nonetheless.
    1. Re:Two Sides to the Coin by Caliburn_Susanto · · Score: 1

      Bravo for this intelligent and reasonable response. Knee-jerk vitriol from the Second Life haters out there who don't get it and don't want to (or don't have the intelligence to) abound in forums, but this relatively new technology of interactive virtual space has much to offer currently and even more potential as it improves.

      Your description of this training facility by Imperial College as a (and should be ONLY) "go between" introduction that makes a transition from the printed textbook to the hands-on live training is right on. It was exactly what I was thinking when I visited the facility about a week ago and ran through a couple of the simulations. Reading scenarios in a textbook is one thing, but having a real-time activity to participate in is much more compelling and thought-provoking. The fact that the patient in front of you will "die" if you make a mistake definitely gets the adrenalin going and most assuredly has value as a training tool.

      Good luck with your simulation project, I'm sure it will be a valuable tool in the education process.

    2. Re:Two Sides to the Coin by retchdog · · Score: 1

      I'm not a nursing student nor am I a nurse, doctor or in fact anyone in the medical profession. I am, however, a third year computing student.

      And that's my cue to stop reading. Thanks!

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    3. Re:Two Sides to the Coin by indiechild · · Score: 1

      Exactly right. When you're holding a hammer, everything looks like a goddamn nail.

    4. Re:Two Sides to the Coin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excellent synopsis, and I appreciate hearing about your experience developing such a system. Caution must be taken to make sure that a system like this does not become a barrier to hands on experience, but your post has evinced the virtues of the system you and your team are diligently working to construct. I wish you the best of luck and success.

    5. Re:Two Sides to the Coin by not-my-real-name · · Score: 1

      I find it curious that the reactions to this idea are both so sceptical and so negative.

      I've been noticing this a lot lately as well. It seems like a quick way to get an "Insightful" mod is to start pointing out all the possible flaws in a new idea (what could possibly go wrong). I'm not sure if these are real objections or people looking for quick karma.

      Good grief. We're suppose to be anti-social nerds. Anything to help cut down on dealing with real people is a good thing, right? Right?

      --
      un-ALTERED reproduction and dissimination of this IMPORTANT information is ENCOURAGED
    6. Re:Two Sides to the Coin by velen · · Score: 1

      Oh please! What about a freaking field trip to a hospital instead of screwing around with a computer? You are training humans to be robots blindly following a process. Human interaction is what doctors are supposed to be good at. Eventually a computer can order a battery of laboratory tests and prescribe medicines based on what the pharmaceutical companies peddle.

    7. Re:Two Sides to the Coin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The controls are fiddly and odd, the world is not always easy to navigate in, there are other people around, unexpected interruptions, lag preventing any sort of decent real-time training...

      Why not just run a local Open Sim?

    8. Re:Two Sides to the Coin by reed · · Score: 1

      Thank you, this is very insightul. We really do need to be careful about what we are claiming an online virtual world (VW) can and cannot do.

      One role I do see VWs being good at is simulation of *processes*, if not specific physical skills -- processes of communication, sequences of action, decision making, etc. A high level simulation like this can present students with a set of circumstances on a more abstract level, to let them figure out how they might deal with it in RL. When it comes to learning how to actually do exams, surgery, whatever, you then certainly need to get into a real hospital.

      This is how the armed forces have been using "games" of various kinds (just recently using computer games) for a long time-- to try out and practice strategic and tactical possabilities.

      In a large scale world (like SL), you can even try to model lots of aspects of a complex system like a hospital, everything from scheduling of shifts and personel assignment, to how supplies and medications are stored, ordered, transported, and delivered, to physical layout of the rooms and placement of machines, phones, whatever, and more, and see how they interact.

      But we need to remember always SL is *not* Virtual Reality.

    9. Re:Two Sides to the Coin by Alurian · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry... you appear to have missed the point of... well, everything.

      --
      A sheathed sword is a sword nonetheless.
    10. Re:Two Sides to the Coin by Alurian · · Score: 1

      This is how the armed forces have been using "games" of various kinds (just recently using computer games) for a long time-- to try out and practice strategic and tactical possabilities.

      This is an excellent example, it's exactly the sort of thing that I believe Second Life in these instances is being used for. You've hit the nail on the head, thank you for your insightful reply.

      --
      A sheathed sword is a sword nonetheless.
  24. Straw Man by mdwh2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    +5 for a straw man argument? It's not about replacing face to face training, it's a step before that. I would imagine it adds to what's currently practiced on a faceless dummy, or just reading a textbook, or being lectured at.

    If you want to learn to be a doctor - go to a real medical school

    What - like Imperial College, London? You talk as if people are replacing medical schools with schools solely existing in Second Life, which would be absurd.

    Slashdot is so predictable. Anything involving certain topics such as Second Life, Wikipedia or Facebook automatically draws criticism, independent of actual facts or evidence. Yes, obviously we should trust a random guy on Slashdot over medical experts in one of the top Universities, perhaps in the world. If the same new story reported a University using a virtual simulator that didn't involve Second Life, I bet you wouldn't have made these comments.

  25. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  26. Okay lets try this by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

    "OR, you must vigorously scrub your hands for 2-3 minutes with special cleanser before you're clean to "gown up."**1 When you're standing around waiting for the procedure to start, you have to have your hands crossed in front of you in a special position to avoid touching anything that isn't sterile, including your own face, sides of your gown, etc.**2 Good luck reproducing these intricate details in Second Life."

    1 sink with a "scrub hands" animation rigged to a clock script
    2 Animation override with "zero contact" stand animation

    and one of the biggest things with this is you can lock the camera to your self and see exactly how to do the pose

    SL is more to be used as a "Role Play" environment so that you can get protocol and language down
    they are most likely using this a stupid prevention

    --
    Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
  27. This is entirely pointless and unuseful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yea, you can program avatars to appear to have certain conditions, but then all you're teaching students is how YOU THINK they should treat them and then rewarding them based on that scenario when in fact the problem in real life could be so much more far complex and the recommended treatment in the game is significantly wrong and you end up killing real patients.
     
    This is completely stupid as everything has to be PROGRAMMED and diseases in real life don't fall under this paradigm, hence why the medical profession is still called a "practice", it's still in the beta stages and will never be figured out completely.
     
    Imagine you're one of these "real patients" and they tell you you need to get on second life and "play sick" for an avatar doctor instead of receiving REAL TREATMENT. This is completely stupid.

  28. iDoc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clearly they need to do this on an iPhone so they can have MULTItouch.

  29. Cold comfort by yog · · Score: 1

    How many people would feel comforted knowing that the resident assigned to them has practiced mainly in a virtual reality setting? There's no substitute for sitting at someone's bedside, taking their hand, feeling their pulse, and looking at their face for signs of distress. You can't avoid human contact at some point. You are going to have to go in that real, physical room and come face to face with a real, physical person who is perhaps suffering, giving off vibes of distress and pain, or crumping and about to die. The way for a student doctor to develop good instincts is to be around real patients, not fancy graphical representations thereof.

    You can't gain good doctoring skills in an online chatroom. In fact, I would venture that the opposite would occur. The common complaint is that doctors are too inhuman, too distant from their patients, seated behind an imposing desk with a computer monitor and lots of medical texts. Doctors don't get enough face time with patients as it is. Now we are seeing a proposal to reduce that face time even more. This is not going to fly.

    As for the expense of training facilities--ridiculous! The avatars represent real people, so every hour a student spends in this system is an hour they have to pay real practitioners, and practitioners don't come cheap. Facilities already exist--they're called hospitals, and medical students spend two years doing full time clinical rotations through the various specialties.

    Regarding taking risks--medical students don't take risks. They don't practice medicine. Their job is to stand and watch while licensed professionals do the clinical work. The most a med student might do is run to the lab for test results, or help take vital signs, or answer quiz questions by attendings. Why this needs to be virtualized is simply beyond me.

    --
    it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
    1. Re:Cold comfort by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      How many people would feel comforted knowing that the resident assigned to them has practiced mainly in a virtual reality setting?

      If you take a commercial flight it is quite possible that the first officer is flying that type of aircraft for the first time after training on simulators.

      Thanks mostly to work done by NASA in the 1960s aircraft simulators offer a high fidelity training environment, but second life is one way in which the simulation of human interaction can be improved.

      My nephew had an operation a couple of days ago. His family were quite upset that he was seen by three groups of students in the two hours before the procedure. Each group went through the same process. It was quite disturbing to them. Maybe by doing some training in a virtual environment the load on real patients can be reduced slightly.

    2. Re:Cold comfort by Dragonslicer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's no substitute for sitting at someone's bedside, taking their hand, feeling their pulse, and looking at their face for signs of distress.

      No, but simulations are good supporting experience, especially if you work on a simulator, and therefore know the routine basics, before doing your live training. You won't get residents that spent their entire internship in simulations, but you'll probably get interns that at least got some basic simulator experience during medical school.

    3. Re:Cold comfort by somersault · · Score: 1

      There's no substitute for sitting at someone's bedside, taking their hand, feeling their pulse, and looking at their face for signs of distress.

      It's true, but I've now learned that it's wrong to break into strangers houses.

      --
      which is totally what she said
  30. You got that right by Minwee · · Score: 1

    'You can take risks that aren't safe in the real world'

    You sure can. A resident in a real hospital who filled someone's office with gigantic severed penises would probably get sacked and arrested. In Sadville that kind of thing is no more surprising than rain.

  31. it's about time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have been looking for the STI clinic in Second Life, that pain in my carpal muscle just won't go away

  32. Are the virtual doctors just as annoying? by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

    'The real innovation in SL clinical simulations is that they bring people together in a clinical space - you are standing next to an avatar who is a real patient, and the doctor avatar to your right is a resident at Massachusetts General Hospital and the nurse to your left is at the University of Pennsylvania hospital,'

    (emphasis added)

    I know that when I'm stuck in a hospital, the first thing I want to do is log into Second Life and play a patient lying in a bed in the hospital so that virtual doctors can harass me there as well. I can just see it now...some poor guy tries to get out of bed in Second Life, only to have a handful of doctors and nurses surround him suddenly and insist that he's not well enough to get up, despite his claims that "he's been healed" and the fact that he's jumping around the virtual room like a maniac. Sounds like my idea of fun.

  33. No. no.no. Left for Dead, not second life! by refactored · · Score: 1

    You have the wrong game.

  34. graphic workstations by t3chn0n3rd · · Score: 0

    Wow, I would like to see the workstations the software is designed on.

  35. That reminds me of this story... by rbarreira · · Score: 2, Interesting
    --

    The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  36. What do you mean I can't fly?! by velen · · Score: 2, Funny

    You mean I actually have to walk in that crowd?

  37. Tags in the Headline by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

    Why are there tags in the headline?

    --
    Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!