Comparison of Different User Interfaces for 360-Degree Videos in

VR-Based Healthcare Education

Yan Hu

1 a

, Jessica Berner

2 b

, Veronica Sundstedt

1 c

and Ivan Perlesi

Department of Computer Science, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden

Department of Built Environment, Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands

Virotea AB, Malmö, Sweden

Keywords:

Virtual Reality, Education, Healthcare, Interface Design, 360-Degree Videos, Older Adults.

Abstract:

Extended reality (XR) technology has been increasingly used in many areas, one being healthcare. This paper

presents a pilot study comparing two 360-degree virtual reality (VR) healthcare applications. The applica-

tions were evaluated by eight nursing students who evaluated both interfaces based on the User Experience

Questionnaire (UEQ), the System Usability Scale (SUS), and the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ).

Results show that both applications could provide a positive user experience and high usability, with some im-

provements shown in the second version of the application. The SSQ scores also showed that minimal motion

sickness occurred. Overall, all participants thought the VR-based education provided an innovative alternative

to traditional education scenarios.

1 INTRODUCTION

An ageing population is a relatively new problem

from a historical point of view; the population aged

65 years and over is estimated to be around 40% in

2050, but mainly, the ratio of older adults compared

to adolescents will be on the increase (Rudnicka et al.,

2020). One priority will be to support healthy age-

ing through age-friendly environments that enable the

person to continue living independently for as long as

possible and doing things they value. Furthermore,

combatting ageism is a priority, and actions from the

World Health Organization (WHO) have been taken

to change how people feel and think toward older

adults (DESA, 2020).

Providing good health care for the ageing popula-

tion is essential. Many older adults require a compre-

hensive set of services to maintain health and prevent

or slow down both physical and mental decline. Tech-

nology in the home and/or health care facility (for

those in long-term care) is a solution that is already in

place, where health care professionals can support the

older person much better. For example, in long-term

care, often a team of specialized care professionals,

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1908-4892

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2848-2377

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3639-9327

such as dieticians, geriatricians, nurses, and physical

therapists, is now only available through the help of

technology. Information and communication technol-

ogy (ICT) helps maintain patient communication, and

technology can help manage chronic conditions such

as diabetes, help manage taking medicine, and also,

through regular contact, improve physical and cogni-

tive function (Choi et al., 2024).

Much needs to go into the carers’ and healthcare

professionals’ education/view on aligning health sys-

tems with healthy ageing. A general lack of dementia

training and education is often reported by healthcare

providers (Zhao et al., 2021). Poor staff skills, knowl-

edge and attitudes are reported to contribute to the low

standard of care for persons with dementia (Hutch

et al., 2023). Often, smaller workshops or educa-

tional programs can increase understanding of the ill-

ness or give basic tools to care for an older adult. It

is noted that the nurses’ conﬁdence usually increases

after such learning sessions, which is needed.

Information on older people’s health status and

functioning is lacking. Some known aspects, such

as lack of social support and socioeconomic status,

often affect long-term health. Underlying healthcare

conditions, impairments, and contextual factors (such

as socio-economic status) affect health. Furthermore,

there is less available data on older adults than other

people and many countries (in Europe alone) differ

890

Hu, Y., Berner, J., Sundstedt, V. and Perlesi, I.

Comparison of Different User Interfaces for 360-Degree Videos in VR-Based Healthcare Education.

DOI: 10.5220/0013366900003911

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Biomedical Engineering Systems and Technologies (BIOSTEC 2025) - Volume 2: HEALTHINF, pages 890-897

ISBN: 978-989-758-731-3; ISSN: 2184-4305

in how people age. Identifying the needs of older

adults can be difﬁcult; for example, screening meth-

ods of deﬁning and measuring frailty and pre-frailty

are not consistent (Lagiewka, 2012). Social charac-

teristics are even scarcer, yet are considered part of

health today.

1.1 Education in Health Providers in

Older Adults

The competence of healthcare providers inﬂuences

the quality of care for older adults with demen-

tia. Nurses are key in maintaining respect and dig-

nity for their patients and recognizing their inherent

worth (Holmberg et al., 2020). Additionally, it is cru-

cial to respect patients’ autonomy, involving them in

decisions about their care as much as possible. De-

mentia care prioritizes well-being, considering the pa-

tient holistically alongside the needs of their family

and care providers. Addressing care providers’ men-

tal health, for instance, can reduce costs by preventing

depression and anxiety among them. Physical activity

and regular exercise help cognitive function across the

lifespan (Jean and Dotson, 2024). Physical exercise

has been shown to help protect against Alzheimer’s

disease, and nurses support this by encouraging activ-

ity and providing additional guidance on health topics

like nutrition and smoking cessation.

Professionals often beneﬁt from education in

the workplace, but continuing education must allow

for ﬂexible schedules and the ability to deliver re-

motely (Scerbe et al., 2019). Nurses must be famil-

iar with technology to guide patients using digital ap-

plications supporting health and autonomy. Health-

care digitization aims to provide more personalized

care by offering tailored solutions. Many healthcare

leaders are implementing digital tools to drive im-

provements, often with government support, such as

in Sweden, which has promoted artiﬁcial intelligence

(AI) in healthcare since 2018 (OECD, 2018).

New technologies, including remote monitoring

and digital patient records, enable patients to be more

involved in their care and foster collaboration among

healthcare professionals. However, for digital solu-

tions to be effective, they must be accessible, easy

to use, and inclusive, ensuring that all patient groups

beneﬁt from advancements.

Many education programs work with mannequins

that are more or less advanced. Mainly, “high ﬁdelity”

mannequins increase learning outcomes (Sherwood

and Francis, 2018). They have features such as voice,

skin, and other installations that recreate a person.

Nursing students learn to put on a catheter, take blood

samples, talk to the doll, administer transfusion and

perform evaluation for acute care. The idea is to in-

crease learning outcomes by being able to touch and

practice on the doll/mannequin. However, there is

still a lack of practice in attitude, reality, and han-

dling patients in speciﬁc situations, which increases

the nurses’ readiness to enter working life. Personal,

clinical, organisational and relational characteristics

all come into play. With older adults with dementia,

the relational aspect can be challenging, especially as

it can take years to understand the illness and be able

to handle the patient properly. The aim often is to

move the student from novice to critical thinking and

behavioural response (Munjas, 1985).

1.2 Virtual Reality

VR technology creates a simulated experience, pro-

viding an alternative to the real world. This immersive

environment is typically displayed through a head-

mounted device (HMD), allowing users to interact in

a virtual space (Kardong-Edgren et al., 2019). VR has

been utilized in various ﬁelds, including gaming, ed-

ucation, manufacturing, and tourism. Among these,

healthcare has rapidly developed as a signiﬁcant ap-

plication area. The primary uses of VR in healthcare

include prevention, treatment, medical education, and

training (Fu et al., 2022).

VR has been proven to support healthcare profes-

sionals and help them advance in understanding sit-

uations and people better through simulation videos.

Nursing programmes often gain experience through

both practical and theoretical moments. A well-

thought-through academic programme is usually one

side of the degree. Meeting people is also key in the

nursing profession, so scenarios and simulations are

extremely helpful in gaining conﬁdence and prepar-

ing students for various situations.

1.3 Paper Overview

This study presents a pilot case of a VR-based edu-

cational application for healthcare education in older

adults. The main aim is to assess two versions of

the VR-based educational application interface and

discover the nursing students’ learning experience

through immersive VR. The evaluation focuses on us-

ability, user experience, simulator sickness, and par-

ticipants’ feedback to open-ended questions.

Section 2 describes the related work in healthcare

education in VR and user interface design in VR ap-

plications. Section 3 is about the method on how we

conduct our pilot study. The results are presented in

Section 4 and discussed in Section 5. Section 6 con-

cludes the study and proposes future work.

Comparison of Different User Interfaces for 360-Degree Videos in VR-Based Healthcare Education

891

2 RELATED WORK

2.1 Healthcare Education in VR

Gorman et al. early on proposed using VR for medi-

cal professionals to provide training and education be-

fore entering the real patient scenario (Gorman et al.,

2000). Peng et al. also allowed nursing students to

watch a movie about dementia and take part in a vir-

tual detention tour in which they got to experience a

scenario more closely to a person with the condition,

which was shown to increase their empathy toward

demented elders (Peng et al., 2020).

The described related work below focuses on VR

healthcare education and training for nurses or care

providers, particularly for older people. A previ-

ous scoping review has explored opportunities and

challenges for using VR/AR in aged care and pro-

poses, based on the literature, that these new tech-

nologies can have several health beneﬁts, like over-

all well-being, decreased loneliness, increased relax-

ation, alertness and balance (To-Miles et al., 2022).

Another review focuses on using MR technology for

fall prevention among older adults with a positive ef-

fect on their physical health (Nishchyk et al., 2021).

In (Bauer and Andringa, 2020), VR has been used to

train cognitive functions for the elderly.

XR has recently been suggested to allow medi-

cal staff to sense how it is to be sick (Shaikh et al.,

2022). VR technology has also recently been used for

training empathy for elderly care staff (McCalla et al.,

2023; Zhang, 2024). In another study, VR was used to

educate healthcare practitioners about different med-

ical conditions like diabetes, disabilities, and elderly

abuse and neglect (Beverly et al., 2023). VR has also

been used to train nursing students in human anatomy

courses to improve students’ learning (Jallad, 2024).

Oral health can be a problem for the elderly, and a

VR simulation was proposed to train care providers

to brush their teeth more effectively with an improved

result in brushing skills (Mouri et al., 2023).

Previous work has also explored how VR can ed-

ucate medical students on the 4Ms in geriatric care:

What Matters, Medication, Mentation, and Mobility

as part of the Age-Friendly Health System (AFHS)

framework (Tewary et al., 2024). In this VR sce-

nario, the students learned about triaging a hip frac-

ture and treating patients from admission to discharge,

showing experience in AFHS. Overall, this study also

showed potential for using VR technology, highlight-

ing the importance of further clinical trials.

2.2 User Interface Design in VR

Applications

There are standard guidelines for traditional user in-

terface design. One of the most well-known is the

ten usability heuristics proposed by Nielsen (Nielsen,

2005). However, when it comes to VR applications,

the focus shifts to 3D user interface design rather than

2D user interface design. The development of 3D

user interface design principles is not as advanced

as that of standard 2D user interfaces. There is no

standard for 3D user interfaces (3D UIs) until now.

Developing such standards is difﬁcult due to various

input devices, display technologies and interactions.

At the same time, human-computer interaction princi-

ples, such as Nielsen’s heuristics, continue to be rel-

evant in 3D user interface design (LaViola Jr et al.,

2017).

3D UIs enable users to interact with virtual ob-

jects, environments, or information through direct

3D input within physical and virtual spaces (Bow-

man et al., 2008). The ﬁeld of 3D UI design offers

a variety of interaction techniques for tasks like se-

lection, manipulation, and spatial navigation (Riecke

et al., 2018). Many existing techniques can be easily

adapted for new applications. While many techniques

in 3D UI design have been established, there is still

room for innovation. New technologies, like the Leap

Motion device and biosignal interface, offer fresh in-

teraction possibilities. Additionally, techniques can

be tailored for speciﬁc tasks across different applica-

tion domains.

Bowman et al. proposed eight guidelines for user-

friendly 3D interaction techniques. These include

ﬂoating objects as exceptions, ensuring objects do

not interpenetrate, and requiring interaction only with

visible objects (Bowman et al., 2008). Additionally,

Alves et al. identiﬁed a set of guidelines for graph-

ical user interfaces in VR games. Among them, of-

fering depth cues, maintaining a comfortable distance

for displayed content, ensuring text is easily readable,

and avoiding issues related to scale and spacing in the

interactive elements of the VR game UI are the most

common ones (Alves et al., 2020).

Recently, another study also proposed some rec-

ommendations for 3D UI design for VR. First, match-

ing devices to interactions and tasks in 3D environ-

ments is essential. This means ensuring the input

methods’ dimensionality corresponds with the vir-

tual outcomes. Second, reducing degrees of freedom

(DoFs) and imposing constraints when possible is bet-

ter. This can be accomplished using input devices

with fewer DOFs, ignoring some input DOFs, or ap-

plying physical or virtual constraints. Finally, there

HEALTHINF 2025 - 18th International Conference on Health Informatics

892

Figure 1: The screenshot of the older version V1.

is no single best interaction technique. The effective-

ness of VR interaction techniques depends on the na-

ture of the tasks. Since there is no one-size-ﬁts-all so-

lution, it’s suggested to evaluate the dimensional char-

acteristics of each task and choose the most suitable

interaction method or a combination of techniques ac-

cordingly (Yeo et al., 2024).

3 METHODS

A health tech company in Malmö, Sweden, developed

the VR application used in this study. It is speciﬁcally

for training care workers in caring for older adults and

supporting individuals with certain functional impair-

ments (referred to as LSS in Swedish). The training

program utilizes the Pico Neo 3 headset, an affordable

choice. By wearing the VR headset, care providers

can immerse themselves in everyday situations from

the perspective of the care recipients, allowing them

to gain a deeper understanding of the challenges these

individuals face. This study used two versions (V1

and V2) for user evaluation. V1 is the version with

simpler interfaces and 360-degree videos, while V2

has updated graphic user interfaces (GUIs), sum-

marising each scenario’s theoretical knowledge after

the videos and adding more scenarios. In addition,

there have also been improvements to the video res-

olution and text rendering, which make the interface

more legible and aim to reduce eye strain. The size of

the components has also been adjusted, allowing the

user to ﬁt the entire menu inside the viewport com-

fortably. The new version also allows the user to move

closer or back away from the interface to view it com-

fortably. The screenshots from V1 and V2 are shown

in Figure 1 and 2.

As a pilot study, we recruited eight nursing stu-

dents from our university to test two different ver-

sions, V1 and V2. The participants came on the same

day. Before the study started, the instructions were

provided in both written and oral format. Next, the

Figure 2: The screenshot of the improved version V2.

participants signed consent forms. Each participant

began by reading various scenarios related to health-

care for older adults, which were presented in paper-

based descriptions. After the reading, the participants

began the VR education program. Before they wore

the HMD, they completed a pre-survey that gathered

information on their age, gender, previous experience

with extended reality (XR), and their responses to the

Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ). The SSQ is

a widely recognized tool used to assess symptoms of

simulator sickness across various dimensions, includ-

ing nausea, oculomotor and disorientation.

The VR-based education program contains a se-

ries of short 360

◦

videos that present various sim-

ulation scenarios related to everyday care for older

adults. Each scenario is divided into two parts: the

ﬁrst describes the situation, while the second offers

suggested approaches for addressing it.

Participants began with V1. Upon completing V1,

they were asked to ﬁll out several questionnaires, in-

cluding the User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ),

the System Usability Scale (SUS), and the Simula-

tor Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ). The UEQ ques-

tionnaire gathers user feedback on their experiences

with a product, service, or system, focusing on as-

pects like usability, satisfaction, and overall user ex-

perience (Laugwitz et al., 2008). The SUS is a widely

recognized tool for evaluating system usability, com-

prising ten statements that participants respond to us-

ing a 5-point scale ranging from "Strongly Disagree"

to "Strongly Agree" (Brooke et al., 1996). After com-

pleting these questionnaires, the participants took a

brief break before setting up the headset to test V2.

They were asked to ﬁll out the same questionnaires

again after ﬁnishing V2.

After completing both versions, the participants

were required to answer the ﬁnal ﬁve open-ended

questions. These questions addressed other educa-

tional methods they had experienced in their educa-

tion, their preferred teaching-learning methods, their

perspective on using VR-based videos for group edu-

cation, their preferences between V1 and V2, and any

Comparison of Different User Interfaces for 360-Degree Videos in VR-Based Healthcare Education

893

Figure 3: The UEQ score from different versions with dif-

ferent aspects.

additional feedback regarding the VR application.

4 RESULTS

We recruited eight current nursing students at our uni-

versity for our pilot study. The participants range

in age from 20 to 44, with an average age of 27.75.

There are ﬁve female participants and three male par-

ticipants. Regarding their previous experience with

XR, ﬁve out of the eight participants have used VR

applications occasionally.

4.1 UEQ

The UEQ questionnaire consists of 26 items cate-

gorized into six distinct aspects of user experience:

Attractiveness, Perspicuity, Efﬁciency, Dependability,

Stimulation, and Novelty. Attractiveness is the over-

all impression of the product, indicating if the user

likes or does not like the product. Perspicuity evalu-

ates if it is easy to get familiar with the product. Ef-

ﬁciency means how efﬁciently the user can solve his

or her tasks. Dependability is the feeling of control

of the interaction. Stimulation measures how users

are motivated to use the product. Novelty is about

the innovation and creativity of the product. Each

item is rated on a scale from -3 to +3. Scores within

the range of -0.8 to 0.8 represent a neutral evaluation,

while scores exceeding 0.8 indicate a positive evalua-

tion. Conversely, scores below -0.8 suggest a negative

evaluation. Figure 3 shows that both versions have

high scores, and all the aspects are above 1.5. V1 has

higher perspicuity and dependability, while V2 has a

higher score in attractiveness, efﬁciency, stimulation,

and novelty. However, the differences are not signif-

icant due to the small sample size. Furthermore, the

perspicuity of V2 is a bit lower than that of V1, but

it still gets the highest score (2.56) among all six as-

pects.

Figure 4: The SUS score from different versions.

4.2 SUS

The System Usability Scale (SUS) is a questionnaire

consisting of 10 items, where each question is scored

between 0 (strongly disagree) and 4 (strongly agree).

The overall score is calculated by multiplying the sum

of the scores from the ten questions by 2.5, resulting

in a ﬁnal score that ranges from 0 to 100. According

to Bangor et al. (Bangor et al., 2009), the adjective

ratings of SUS classiﬁed above 85 are associated with

“Excellent”, “Good” is just above average at 71, and

“OK” scores at 51. In this pilot study, the SUS score

for V1 is 80.6, while the SUS score for V2 is 85.0.

Both versions have relatively high SUS scores. Based

on the adjective ratings, the usability of V1 is rated as

good, whereas the usability of V2 is rated as excellent,

shown in Figure 5.

4.3 SSQ

The SSQ included 16 symptoms, organized into three

distinct categories: Nausea (N), Oculomotor (O), and

Disorientation (D). Participants assessed the severity

of each symptom using a scale ranging from 0 (none)

to 3 (severe). These individual scores were then

aggregated to create scores for each symptom clus-

ter. The cluster scores were subsequently weighted

to yield a total score (TS). Figure 5 indicates that all

three symptom clusters (N, O, D) and the total score

(TS) are relatively low. Moreover, all the scores af-

ter V1 are lower than those before it. There is only

a slight increase when comparing the scores after V2

to those after V1, leading to a minor rise in the total

score. The SSQ score from this study shows that ex-

posure to both versions of our VR training application

has a very limited effect on motion sickness.

4.4 Free Text Answers

The free text questions explore ﬁve different aspects:

(1) the educational methods typically used to teach

HEALTHINF 2025 - 18th International Conference on Health Informatics

894

Figure 5: The SSQ score before, after V1 and after V2.

students about various health conditions; (2) pref-

erences for learning methods, including VR-based

videos, paper-based reading, and current health ed-

ucation, along with the reasons for these preferences;

(3) options of VR-based videos as a tool for group

training among healthcare providers; (4) preferences

between V1 and V2, including the rationale behind

their choices; and (5) any additional comments related

to the VR application.

The typical methods currently used in nursing ed-

ucation include lectures, literature, watching videos,

and practising with puppets. All participants liked

the VR-based videos; some reasons mentioned were

exciting and more interactive and could help prevent

confusion during learning. Some also empathise that

VR-based videos enhance their understanding of pa-

tient’s behaviours and experiences. One participant

also appreciated that the three learning options could

be combined, allowing nursing students to get a bet-

ter picture of what they are learning by allowing them

to learn from different perspectives. Another partic-

ipant mentioned that VR could effectively serve as a

valuable complement to traditional methods.

When considering the VR-based video on group

training for healthcare providers, all participants

agreed it is a practical educational approach. They

found it instructive, innovative, and an interesting way

to train many healthcare providers. Three participants

preferred V2 due to its aesthetic design, fun, and use-

fulness, as people could see from different perspec-

tives and situations. The rest prefer V1. This could

potentially be because it returns to the menu automat-

ically when the video is over, while V2 needs to click

an extra button.

The participants of this pilot study hope the VR-

based video method could be implemented soon in

nursing education because they think it is very inno-

vative for the basic training of healthcare providers.

Additionally, one user reported that it provides a safe

learning environment and improves accessibility. Fur-

thermore, to improve the user experience, it is sug-

gested that interactions in VR-based training be in-

creased.

5 DISCUSSION

Although the number of participants in this pilot study

is small, some interesting ﬁndings still exist. V2 in

this study had improved the GUIs, which aligned with

some guidelines, such as a comfortable distance and

making texts easy to read. However, 3D UIs can

be pretty expressive and facilitate complex tasks; not

every task in a 3D UI requires advanced interaction

methods. When users have straightforward goals, de-

signers must focus on offering simple and intuitive

techniques. From this study, we also found when as-

signing physical buttons to commands, it is essential

to resist the urge to create a new button for each com-

mand (McKay, 2013). Users often struggle to recall

numerous buttons, and it can become challenging to

remember the relationships between buttons and func-

tions. In this case, only one extra button made users

feel less control over the interaction, and it took work

to get familiar with the application, which directly af-

fected the user experience.

Empathy is considered a critical component in re-

lationships. It enables healthcare professionals to im-

prove patient health, which makes it essential to in-

corporate it into the curriculum to teach health profes-

sionals to be more responsive to patient needs (Wen

et al., 2024). It also helps healthcare professionals

to focus on patient-centered care. Therefore, it is es-

sential to develop empathy, a key element of patient-

centered care. It includes cognitive and affective as-

pects which allow a person to respond to verbal and

non-verbal cues. It has also been shown to deliver

better care: less anxiety and distress, fewer med-

ical errors and better patient adherence to medica-

tion (Peng et al., 2020). To reach this goal, one way is

to improve communication skills; experimental learn-

ing and simulation-based education are appropriate

for teaching empathy (Cho and Kim, 2024). This

study found that VR could increase the motivation for

learning and understanding due to its dependability

and perspicuity. The SUS indicated high scores in

both versions, supporting the development of empa-

thy. The participants expressed that VR made learn-

ing exciting and interactive, with less room for error,

which was also mentioned by Jallad (Jallad, 2024).

Building conﬁdence through virtual videos offers care

providers a rare opportunity to experience older adults

hands-on, improving the care providers’ understand-

ing of demented persons. As the population of older

Comparison of Different User Interfaces for 360-Degree Videos in VR-Based Healthcare Education

895

adults increases globally, VR could serve as an ef-

fective tool for understanding and providing care for

individuals with dementia.

The applications we used in this study, V1 and

V2, involve minimal interaction. The only interac-

tion required is clicking buttons to control the menu.

Some participants suggested that more interactive el-

ements could be added in the future, bringing poten-

tial trends in VR-based education. In addition to us-

ing 360-degree videos in VR, interacting with virtual

avatars could be another effective method for training

healthcare providers to engage in various situations.

This study demonstrates that all participants have a

favourable view of VR-based education in healthcare,

even with group training. However, traditional health-

care education methods remain signiﬁcant in nursing

education. In the future, the most effective approach

will likely involve a combination of VR-based meth-

ods and other educational methods.

6 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE

WORK

This pilot study evaluates two different interfaces of

360-degree VR-based healthcare education applica-

tions. V1 is the initial interface, while V2 incorpo-

rates improvements to certain interface features based

on design principles. The study involved eight partic-

ipants, all currently nursing students at the university.

The results indicate that both versions provide a pos-

itive user experience and high usability. The system

usability of V1 was rated as good and for V2 it was

rated as excellent. Additionally, the SSQ scores post-

testing reveal that both versions cause minimal mo-

tion sickness, indicating that the side effects of motion

sickness do not signiﬁcantly impact this VR-based ap-

plication. All the participants in this study think VR-

based video is an interactive and innovative health-

care education method. Some users also indicate that

it could complement traditional methods like lectures

and readings. All participants reported that it could

also be an effective method for group training. The

simplicity of the design could be one of the main fac-

tors inﬂuencing the user experience; in this case, it is

an extra button. However, the number of evaluators in

this study was low, and more users are needed to draw

statistical conclusions. In the future, more interaction

in VR-based education applications is expected. Per-

sonalization will be another emerging direction in the

future development of these applications. It would

be interesting to explore how tailoring the education

experience to individual learners can enhance engage-

ment and improve learning outcomes.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research was funded partly by the Knowledge

Foundation, Sweden, through the Human-Centered

Intelligent Realities (HINTS) Proﬁle Project (con-

tract 20220068). This study has ethical approval by

the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (Dnr: 2023-

03019-01).

REFERENCES

Alves, S., Callado, A., and Jucá, P. (2020). Evaluation of

graphical user interfaces guidelines for virtual reality

games. In 2020 19th Brazilian Symposium on Com-

puter Games and Digital Entertainment (SBGames),

pages 71–79. IEEE.

Bangor, A., Kortum, P., and Miller, J. (2009). Determining

what individual sus scores mean: Adding an adjective

rating scale. Journal of usability studies, 4(3):114–

123.

Bauer, A. and Andringa, G. (2020). The potential of im-

mersive virtual reality for cognitive training in elderly.

Gerontology, 66:1–10.

Beverly, E., Love, C., Love, M., Lammert, L., and

Bowditch, J. (2023). Cinematic virtual reality for

educating health care providers about type 2 dia-

betes, disability, and elder abuse and neglect: A pi-

lot study. Journal of diabetes science and technology,

17:19322968231171586.

Bowman, D. A., Coquillart, S., Froehlich, B., Hirose, M.,

Kitamura, Y., Kiyokawa, K., and Stuerzlinger, W.

(2008). 3d user interfaces: New directions and per-

spectives. IEEE computer graphics and applications,

28(6):20–36.

Brooke, J. et al. (1996). Sus-a quick and dirty usability

scale. Usability evaluation in industry, 189(194):4–7.

Cho, M.-K. and Kim, M. Y. (2024). Effectiveness of

simulation-based interventions on empathy enhance-

ment among nursing students: a systematic literature

review and meta-analysis. BMC nursing, 23(1):319.

Choi, J.-Y., Kim, H., Chun, S., Jung, Y.-i., Yoo, S., Oh, I.-

H., Kim, G.-S., Ko, J. Y., Lim, J.-Y., Lee, M., et al.

(2024). Information technology-supported integrated

health service for older adults in long-term care set-

tings. BMC medicine, 22(1):212.

DESA, U. (2020). World social report 2020: Inequality in

a rapidly changing world. New York, NY: Department

of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations.

Fu, Y., Hu, Y., and Sundstedt, V. (2022). A systematic liter-

ature review of virtual, augmented, and mixed reality

game applications in healthcare. ACM Transactions

on Computing for Healthcare (HEALTH), 3(2):1–27.

Gorman, P. J., Meier, A. H., Rawn, C., and Krummel, T. M.

(2000). The future of medical education is no longer

blood and guts, it is bits and bytes. The American

Journal of Surgery, 180(5):353–356.

HEALTHINF 2025 - 18th International Conference on Health Informatics

896

Holmberg, B., Hellström, I., and Österlind, J. (2020). Ele-

ments of assisted bodily care: Ethical aspects. Nursing

ethics, 27(6):1377–1395.

Hutch, W., O’Sullivan, T., and Foley, T. (2023). Demen-

tia palliative care education and training for healthcare

professionals: a scoping review protocol. HRB Open

Research, 5:13.

Jallad, S. (2024). The effectiveness of immersive virtual

reality applications (human anatomy) on self-directed

learning competencies among undergraduate nursing

students: A cross-sectional study. Anatomical Sci-

ences Education, 17:1764–1775.

Jean, K. R. and Dotson, V. M. (2024). Dementia: Com-

mon Syndromes and Modiﬁable Risk and Protective

Factors. Neurologic Clinics, 42(4):793–807.

Kardong-Edgren, S. S., Farra, S. L., Alinier, G., and Young,

H. M. (2019). A call to unify deﬁnitions of virtual

reality. Clinical simulation in nursing, 31:28–34.

Lagiewka, K. (2012). European innovation partnership on

active and healthy ageing: triggers of setting the head-

line target of 2 additional healthy life years at birth at

eu average by 2020. Archives of Public Health, 70:1–

Laugwitz, B., Held, T., and Schrepp, M. (2008). Con-

struction and evaluation of a user experience question-

naire. In 4th Symposium of the Workgroup Human-

Computer Interaction and Usability Engineering of

the Austrian Computer Society, USAB 2008, Graz,

Austria, November 20-21, 2008. Proceedings 4, pages

63–76. Springer.

LaViola Jr, J. J., Kruijff, E., McMahan, R. P., Bowman, D.,

and Poupyrev, I. P. (2017). 3D user interfaces: theory

and practice. Addison-Wesley Professional.

McCalla, M., Jones, D., Grice, R., Love, M., Love, C.,

Lammert, L., and Beverly, E. (2023). Feasibility

of a cinematic-virtual reality training program for

health professional students: A single-arm pre-post

study. Journal of diabetes science and technology,

17:19322968231171136.

McKay, E. N. (2013). UI is communication: How to de-

sign intuitive, user centered interfaces by focusing on

effective communication. Newnes.

Mouri, N., Sasaki, M., Yagimaki, T., Murakami, M., Igari,

K., and Sasaki, K. (2023). Development of a train-

ing simulator for caregivers’ toothbrushing skill us-

ing virtual reality. Advanced Biomedical Engineering,

12:91–100.

Munjas, B. A. (1985). From novice to expert: excellence

and power in clinical nursing practice. Journal of

Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services,

23(5):39–39.

Nielsen, J. (2005). Ten usability heuristics.

Nishchyk, A., Chen, W., Pripp, A., and Bergland, A. (2021).

The effect of mixed reality technologies for falls pre-

vention among older adults: Systematic review and

meta-analysis. JMIR Aging, 4:e27972.

OECD (2018). Fostering the digital transformations among

individuals, ﬁrms and in the government. Technical

report, OECD, Paris.

Peng, X., Wu, L., Xie, X., Dai, M., and Wang, D. (2020).

Impact of virtual dementia tour on empathy level of

nursing students: a quasi-experimental study. Inter-

national journal of nursing sciences, 7(3):258–261.

Riecke, B. E., LaViola Jr, J. J., and Kruijff, E. (2018). 3d

user interfaces for virtual reality and games: 3d se-

lection, manipulation, and spatial navigation. In ACM

SIGGRAPH 2018 Courses, pages 1–94.

Rudnicka, E., Napierała, P., Podﬁgurna, A., M˛eczekalski,

B., Smolarczyk, R., and Grymowicz, M. (2020). The

world health organization (who) approach to healthy

ageing. Maturitas, 139:6–11.

Scerbe, A., O’Connell, M., Astell, A., Morgan, D., Koste-

niuk, J., and DesRoches, A. (2019). Digital tools

for delivery of dementia education for health-care

providers: a systematic review. Educational Geron-

tology, 45(11):681–699.

Shaikh, T., Rasool, T., and Soﬁ, S. (2022). A data-centric

artiﬁcial intelligent and extended reality technology in

smart healthcare systems. Social Network Analysis

and Mining, 12.

Sherwood, R. J. and Francis, G. (2018). The effect of man-

nequin ﬁdelity on the achievement of learning out-

comes for nursing, midwifery and allied healthcare

practitioners: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nurse Education Today, 69:81–94.

Tewary, S., Shnayder, O., Dezine, M., and Pandya, N.

(2024). Design and development of virtual reality ap-

plication implementing age-friendly care and the 4ms:

A quality improvement project. International Jour-

nal of Environmental Research and Public Health,

21:1279.

To-Miles, F., Mann, J., and Hung, L. (2022). Facilitators

and barriers to using virtual reality and augmented re-

ality and its impact on social engagement in aged care

settings: a scoping review protocol. BMJ Open, 12(8).

Wen, J., Yan, H., Wang, S., Xu, J., and Zhou, Z. (2024).

The effectiveness of nursing interventions for elderly

dementia patients based on virtual reality technology:

A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ageing Re-

search Reviews, 93:102135.

Yeo, A., Kwok, B. W., Joshna, A., Chen, K., and Lee,

J. S. (2024). Entering the next dimension: A review

of 3d user interfaces for virtual reality. Electronics,

13(3):600.

Zhang, J. (2024). Application of Virtual Reality in Empathy

Training for Elderly Care Personnel, pages 335–342.

Zhao, Y., Liu, L., and Chan, H. Y.-l. (2021). Dementia care

education interventions on healthcare providers’ out-

comes in the nursing home setting: A systematic re-

view. Research in Nursing & Health, 44(6):891–905.

Comparison of Different User Interfaces for 360-Degree Videos in VR-Based Healthcare Education

897