JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Immersive technologies such as virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and mixed reality (MR) are used in pediatric interventional cardiology (IC) to improve anatomical visualization, spatial understanding and support procedural precision. These technologies offer three-dimensional representations of complex cardiac structures, which can aid in pre-procedural planning, intraoperative navigation, and team communication. As these technologies gain traction in IC, understanding how medical specialists perceive their value is vital.

Objective:

This study assesses what IC specialists consider valuable in immersive technologies by evaluating their experiences with CardioVision, a software designed for pediatric IC procedures.

Methods:

A mixed methods design was used, combining questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Participants submitted IC cases for software testing. These were uploaded to CardioVision. Participants completed a pre-test questionnaire, used the software, and thereafter completed a post-test questionnaire, which included System Usability Scale (SUS) and Likert-scale questions on experience with the software. The interviews explored the specialists’ experience with the software’s performance. Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation (r) were used to compare the specialists’ expectations with actual performance of CardioVision. A p value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Qualitative data were analysed using inductive content analysis, which involved subjective interpretation of textual data from the interviews. The analysis focused on identifying and classifying emerging codes, which were then grouped into sub-themes and overarching main themes. The process followed the inductive content analysis approach outlined by Elo and Kyngäs, which consists of three phases: preparation, organisation, and reporting.

Results:

Eight specialists in IC participated in the study. Six participants completed both the interviews and questionnaires, resulting in 14 data sets. The quantitative results showed higher alignment between expected and actual performance, for clinical decision-making (r = 0.596), but was not statistically significant. In the interviews, themes, user experience, clinical applications, and non-clinical applications emerged, aligning with the quantitative data to show that participants valued the software’s ease of use, high-quality visualization, and decision-making support. Additional benefits included use in medical education, interprofessional collaboration, and patient communication. Collaboration between developers and clinicians was emphasized as vital for effective integration into routine practice.

Conclusions:

Immersive technologies offer clinical value, when aligned with user needs and integrated through collaborative development