Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The purpose of this review was to identify the different augmented reality (AR) modalities used to teach anatomy to students, health professional trainees, and surgeons, and to examine the assessment tools used to evaluate the performance of various AR modalities. A scoping review of four databases was performed using variations of: (1) AR, (2) medical or anatomical teaching/education/training, and (3) anatomy or radiology or cadaver. Scientific articles were identified and screened for the inclusion and exclusion criteria as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses with extension for scoping reviews guidelines. Virtual reality was an exclusion criterion. From this scoping review, data were extracted from a total of 54 articles and the following four AR modalities were identified: head-mounted display, projection, instrument and screen, and mobile device. The usability, feasibility, and acceptability of these AR modalities were evaluated using a variety of quantitative and qualitative assessment tools. Within more recent years of AR integration into anatomy education, the assessment of visuospatial ability, cognitive load, time on task, and increasing academic achievement outcomes are variables of interest, which continue to warrant more exploration. Sufficiently powered studies using validated assessment tools must be conducted to better understand the role of AR in anatomical education.
McBain et al. (Sat,) studied this question.