Evaluating The Effectiveness of The Body Interact Virtual Patient Simulation in Clinical Education: A Bahrain-Based Study

  • Authors

    https://doi.org/10.14419/rdchxk08

    Received date: July 18, 2025

    Accepted date: August 19, 2025

    Published date: September 1, 2025

  • Body Interact, virtual simulation, clinical reasoning, stress tolerance, GCC medical education, Arabian Gulf University, cognitive load, peer learning, tutor feedback, emotional readiness.

  • Abstract

    This study evaluated the impact of the Body Interact virtual patient simulator on medical students at Arabian Gulf University by utilizing pre-post surveys, lecturer feedback, researcher observations, and audio analysis.   Stress tolerance (+71%), engagement (+71%), and clinical reasoning (+1.8 points, d = 2.7) indicated substantial improvements.   Tutors and researchers' data verified a transition from inert learning to active decision-making.   A dual-phase stress adaptation model was created, underscoring the improvement of confidence that occurs because of peer interaction. The results suggest that Body Interact is a theory-driven, effective tool for enhancing clinical skills and emotional preparedness in medical education in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), despite the restriction of verbal collaboration.

    The simulator's design is consistent with the Cognitive Load Theory, Stress Inoculation, and Deliberate Practice frameworks.  Its capacity to simulate dynamic patient states and provide real-time feedback facilitated immersive, emotionally engaging learning.  The results establish Body Interact as a scalable innovation that can be used to improve clinical preparedness in the Gulf region. This has implications for the integration of curriculum and the development of faculty.

  • References

    1. A. A. Kononowicz et al., “Virtual Patient Simulations in Health Professions Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration.,” J Med Internet Res, vol. 21, no. 7, p. e14676, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.2196/14676.
    2. P. Croskerry and G. Norman, “Overconfidence in Clinical Decision Making,” Am J Med, vol. 121, no. 5, pp. S24–S29, May 2008, doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2008.02.001.
    3. E. P. Monico, “Patient Safety in Emergency Medicine,” Ann Emerg Med, vol. 54, no. 4, p. 644, Oct. 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2009.04.001.
    4. M. A. Musen, B. Middleton, and R. A. Greenes, “Clinical Decision-Support Systems,” in Biomedical Informatics, Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021, pp. 795–840. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-58721-5_24.
    5. L. A. Shay and J. E. Lafata, “Where Is the Evidence? A Systematic Review of Shared Decision Making and Patient Outcomes,” Medical Decision Making, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 114–131, Jan. 2015, doi: 10.1177/0272989X14551638.
    6. N. Bodagh, J. Bloomfield, P. Birch, and W. Ricketts, “Problem-based learning: a review,” Br J Hosp Med, vol. 78, no. 11, pp. C167–C170, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.12968/hmed.2017.78.11.C167.
    7. A. Burgess et al., “Scaffolding medical student knowledge and skills: team-based learning (TBL) and case-based learning (CBL),” BMC Med Educ, vol. 21, no. 1, p. 238, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1186/s12909-021-02638-3.
    8. F. Chen, A. M. Lui, and S. M. Martinelli, “A systematic review of the effectiveness of flipped classrooms in medical education,” Med Educ, vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 585–597, Jun. 2017, doi: 10.1111/medu.13272.
    9. D. Dolmans, L. Michaelsen, J. van Merriënboer, and C. van der Vleuten, “Should we choose between problem-based learning and team-based learning? No, combine the best of both worlds!,” Med Teach, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 354–359, Apr. 2015, doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.948828.
    10. J. C. Trullàs, C. Blay, E. Sarri, and R. Pujol, “Effectiveness of problem-based learning methodology in undergraduate medical education: a scoping review,” BMC Med Educ, vol. 22, no. 1, p. 104, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03154-8.
    11. H. Ahmed, M. Allaf, and H. Elghazaly, “COVID-19 and medical education,” Lancet Infect Dis, vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 777–778, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30226-7.
    12. F. Jones, C. Passos-Neto, and O. Melro Braghiroli, “Simulation in Medical Education: Brief history and methodology,” Princi-ples and Practice of Clinical Research Journal, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 56–63, Sep. 2015, doi: 10.21801/ppcrj.2015.12.8.
    13. J. O. Lopreiato and T. Sawyer, “Simulation-Based Medical Education in Pediatrics,” Acad Pediatr, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 134–142, Mar. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2014.10.010.
    14. G. Makransky et al., “Simulation based virtual learning environment in medical genetics counseling: an example of bridging the gap between theory and practice in medical education,” BMC Med Educ, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 98, Dec. 2016, doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0620-6.
    15. J. Moran, G. Briscoe, and S. Peglow, “Current Technology in Advancing Medical Education: Perspectives for Learning and Providing Care,” Aca-demic Psychiatry, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 796–799, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.1007/s40596-018-0946-y.
    16. C. Pinter et al., “SlicerVR for Medical Intervention Training and Planning in Immersive Virtual Reality,” IEEE Trans Med Robot Bionics, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 108–117, May 2020, doi: 10.1109/TMRB.2020.2983199.
    17. W. Song et al., “An Intelligent Virtual Standard Patient for Medical Students Training Based on Oral Knowledge Graph,” IEEE Trans Multimedia, vol. 25, pp. 6132–6145, 2023, doi: 10.1109/TMM.2022.3205456.
    18. S. Tabatabai, “Simulations and Virtual Learning Supporting Clinical Education During the COVID 19 Pandemic,” Adv Med Educ Pract, vol. Vol-ume 11, pp. 513–516, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S257750.
    19. R.-J. Wilcha, “Effectiveness of Virtual Medical Teaching During the COVID-19 Crisis: Systematic Review,” JMIR Med Educ, vol. 6, no. 2, p. e20963, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.2196/20963.
    20. B. Wheeler and E. Dippenaar, “The use of simulation as a teaching modality for paramedic education: a scoping review,” Br Par-amed J, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 31–43, 2020, doi: 10.29045/14784726.2020.12.5.3.31.
    21. D. J. L. T. R. P. Michael Birtill James King and P. Simpson, “The use of immersive simulation in paramedicine education: a scop-ing review,” Inter-active Learning Environments, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 2428–2443, 2023, doi: 10.1080/10494820.2021.1889607.
    22. N. Rees, “ParaVR: a virtual reality training simulator for paramedic skills maintenance.,” Journal of Paramedic Practice, vol. 2(12), 478, 2020.
    23. J. Ramakrishnan, T. Liu, F. Zhang, K. Seshadri, R. Yu, and U. Creative, “Assessing Artificial Intelligence Awareness and Identi-fying Essential Competencies: Insights from Key Stakeholders in Integrating Ai into Medical Education,” no. Feb, pp. 1–34, 2024, [Online]. Available: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4713042
    24. I. J. Kuckelman, P. H. Yi, M. Bui, I. Onuh, J. A. Anderson, and A. B. Ross, “Assessing AI-Powered Patient Education: A Case Study in Radiolo-gy,” Acad Radiol, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 338–342, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2023.08.020.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Jaber, F. A. ., Mahmood, A. ., Al-Balasmeh, H., Jaber, N. A. ., Jaber, A. A. J., & Abdulsattar, S. S. . (2025). Evaluating The Effectiveness of The Body Interact Virtual Patient Simulation in Clinical Education: A Bahrain-Based Study. International Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 14(5), 10-19. https://doi.org/10.14419/rdchxk08