Currently submitted to: JMIR XR and Spatial Computing (JMXR)
Date Submitted: Apr 13, 2026
Open Peer Review Period: Apr 17, 2026 - Jun 12, 2026
(currently open for review)
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
User Experience with Lumbar Puncture Simulators in Geriatric Medicine Training: A Questionnaire Study
ABSTRACT
Background:
Lumbar puncture in geriatrics can be challenging, requiring technical skill and operator confidence. Simulation provides a valuable opportunity for medical students to practice in a safe environment. Despite the potential of augmented reality simulators, their impact on user experience (UX) across different levels of clinical expertise remains insufficiently investigated.
Objective:
The aim of this study was to evaluate the user experience of two lumbar puncture simulators: M43E (Kyoto Kagaku), a static anatomical model commonly used in French simulation centers, and the Sim&Care 2 (InSimo), an augmented reality simulator with haptic feedback that is less widely implemented in routine training curricula.
Methods:
This single-center UX study, conducted at the University Hospital of Angers, used a cross-sectional within-subject design among 30 participants (7 Graduated physicians, 16 postgraduate medical students, 7 sixth-year second-cycle medical students), involved 15-minutes use of each simulator. Participants completed a user experience questionnaire (realism, ease of use, perceived educational value), followed by a comparative questionnaire. Non-parametric paired and group comparisons were performed.
Results:
The Sim&Care 2 was considered more realistic, providing better sensations (P=.003) and helped participants learn something new (P=.005). The M43E was considered simpler to use (P=.013). No significant difference was observed in overall satisfaction. Concerning overall preference, graduated physicians favored the Sim&Care 2 model for its anatomical realism and haptic feedback, while sixth-year second cycle medical students preferred the M43E model for its realistic procedure execution.
Conclusions:
These findings highlight the complementarity of the simulators and the need to select the appropriate simulator for training according to the learners’ level of expertise: traditional mannequin-based simulation for initial procedural familiarization and augmented reality simulation to enhance three-dimensional anatomical understanding and sensory feedback.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.