Perception of a Nigerian University Radiography Students on the Use of Virtual Reality in Radiography Education 1 1
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.60787/sjhrs.vol1no1.6Keywords:
Radiography Education, Virtual Reality, Transformative Potential, Technology, Healthcare EducationAbstract
Background: Radiography education is increasingly adopting innovative technologies to enhance student learning, engagement, and clinical competence. Virtual Reality (VR) provides an interactive environment that simulate real-life imaging procedures, potentially improving conceptual understanding and diagnostic interpretation skills.
Objectives: This study aimed to assess radiography students’ acceptance, perceptions, and readiness to adopt Virtual Reality in radiography education using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) framework.
Materials and methods: A descriptive cross-sectional survey was conducted among 56 radiography students. Data were collected using a structured, self-administered questionnaire developed on the four UTAUT constructs Performance Expectancy, Effort Expectancy, Facilitating Conditions, and Social Influence. Each construct was assessed using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1(Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, including frequencies and percentages, to summarize students responses and highlight patterns of perception and acceptance of VR-based learning analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 2023
Results: Most respondents demonstrated a high level of agreement across all constructs. For instance, 85.8% agreed that VR enhances understanding, while 89.3% reported that it improves academic performance. Similarly, 88.7% found VR-based learning more engaging, and 88.4% considered it user-friendly. However, challenges were observed in facilitating conditions, as 96.4% of respondents indicated inadequate infrastructure and accessibility issues. Social influence was moderately positive, with 78.6% agreeing that peer and faculty support encouraged adoption.
Conclusion: The study reveals strong acceptance and perceived usefulness of VR among radiography students. Addressing infrastructural and technical support gaps will be essential for successful integration of VR into radiography education in Nigeria
Downloads
References
1. Wade SWT, Velan GM, Tedla N, Briggs N, Moscova M. What works in radiology education for medical students: a systematic review and meta- analysis. BMC Med Educ. 2024;24(1):51. doi:10.1186/s12909-023-04981-z
2. Chau M, Arruzza E, Spuur K, Ofori-Manteaw B. From classroom to global impact: How radiography education advances the sustainable development goals. Radiography. 2025;31(1):224-230. doi:10.1016/j.radi.2024.11.015.
3. Akoob S, Akbar K, Van Wyk J. The use of technology in postgraduate medical education within radiology: a scoping review. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med. 2022;53:94. doi:10.1186/s43055-022-00763-7.
4. Kyei KA, Antwi WK, Bamfo-Quaicoe K, Offei RO. Challenges faced by radiography students during clinical training. Clin Med Res. 2015;4(3- 1):36-41. doi:10.11648/j.cmr.2015040301.18
5. Pottle J. Virtual reality and the transformation of medical education. Future Healthc J. 2019;6(3):181-185. doi:10.7861/fhj.2019-0036
6. Radianti J, Majchrzak TA, Fromm J, Wohlgenannt . A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. Computers & Education.2020;147:103778. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778
7. Kato K, Kon D, Ito T, Nagatani Y, Omata Y, Hagiwara Y, et al. Radiography education with VRusing head-mounted display: proficiency evaluation by rubric method. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):579. doi:10.1186/s12909-022-03645-8.
8. Camargos Silva P, Cyrino GF, de Lelis Barreto unior C, Lamounier Junior EA, Cardoso A, Patrocínio AC, et al. Training in radiology using virtual reality techniques: a brief state- f-the-art review. Res Soc Dev. 2022;10(15):e22507. doi:10.33448/rsd-v10i15.22507.
9. Kononowicz AA, Woodham LA, Edelbring S, Stathakarou N, Davies D, Saxena N, et al. Virtual Patient Simulations in Health Professions Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(7):e14676. doi: 10.2196/14676.
10. Lorusso ML, Travellini S, Giorgetti M, Negrini P, Reni G, Biffi E. Semi-Immersive Virtual Reality as a Tool to Improve Cognitive and Social Abilities in Preschool Children. Applied Sciences. 2020; 10(8):2948. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10082948
11. Pavate AA, Kumawat D, Kallurkar SP. Design and development of virtual reality in education: comparative analysis. Int J Eng Res Technol (IJERT. 2017;5(1):ICIATE-2017. DOI 10.17577/IJERTCONV5IS01188
12. Stracke CM, Bothe P, Adler S, Heller ES, Deuchler J, Pomino J, Wölfel M. Immersive virtualreality in higher education: A systematic review of the scientific literature. Virtual Reality. 2025;29(64). doi:10.1007/s10055-025-01136-x.
13. Hayati Rashdan N, Mohamed Ghazali NA, Che Din S, Lazim NAM. Analysing the elements of 3D design in semi-immersive virtual reality digital learning. Idealogy Journal.2024;10(1).
14. Lai YS, Wang Y, Chen Y. Exploring immersive learning experiences: A survey. Informatics.2022;9(4):75. doi:10.3390/informatics9040075
15. Sujar A, Kelly G, García M, Vidal FP. Interactive teaching environment for diagnostic radiography with real-time X-ray simulation and patient positioning. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2022;17(1):85-95. doi:10.1007/s11548-021-02499-7
16. Lang M, Ghandour S,Rikard B, Balasalle EK, Rouhezamin MR, Zhang H, et al. Medical Extended Reality for Radiology Education and Training. J Am Coll Radiol. 2024;21(10):1583-1594. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2024.05.006.
17. Abdekhoda M, Dehnad A, Zarei J. Factors influencing adoption of e-learning in healthcare:Integration of UTAUT and TTF model. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2022;22(1):327. doi: 10.1186/s12911-022-02060-9 the Use of Virtual Reality in Radiography Education
18. Llanos-Ruiz D, Abella-García V, Ausín- Villaverde V. Virtual Reality in Higher Education: A Systematic Review Aligned ith the Sustainable Development Goals. Societies. 2025; 15(9):251. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15090251
19. Jiang H, Zhu D, Chugh R, Turnbull D, Jin W. Virtual reality and augmented reality–supported K- 12 STEM learning: trends, advantages and challenges. Educ Inf Technol. 2025;30(9):12827- 12863. doi:10.1007/s10639-024-13210-z
20. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly. 2003; 27(3):425-78. doi:10.2307/30036540
21. Suh A, Prophet J. The state of immersive technology research: A literaturenalysis. Comput Human Behav. 2018;86:77-90.doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.019.
22. Lang M, Ghandour S, Rikard B, Balasalle EK, Rouhezamin MR, Zhang H, et al. Medical Extended Reality for Radiology Education and Training. J AmColl Radiol. 2024;21(10):1583-1594. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr. 024.05.006.
23. O'Connor M, Stowe J, Potocnik J, Giannotti N, Murphy S, Rainford L. 3D virtual reality simulationin radiography education: The students' experience. Radiography. 2021;27(1):208-214.doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2020.07.017.
24. Ward T, Jenab K, Ortega-Moody J, Barari G, Molina Acosta LDC. Virtual Classrooms, Real Impact: A Framework for Introducing Virtual Reality to K–12 STEM Learning Based on Best Practices. Applied Sciences. 2025; 15(21):11356. https://doi.org/10.3390/app152111356
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
