Last reviewed: November 2026. This guide is for general information and is not medical advice.
In emergency care, virtual reality (VR) is used almost entirely for training: rehearsing rare, high-pressure situations without risk to patients. Augmented reality (AR) is being tested for remote guidance. Studies show that people learn from VR training. They have not yet shown that patients do better as a result.
Key takeaways
- Training benefit: a review of 34 studies found likely gains in knowledge, retention and skill performance.
- Patient outcomes: the same review found no evidence yet of direct improvement for patients or hospitals.
- How to deliver it: a 2026 review found only six studies comparing different ways of running VR training.
- Side effects: reports of adverse events were infrequent.
In this guide
Training emergency skills
Full-scale simulation with manikins and instructors is the accepted standard for emergency training, but it needs staff, equipment and dedicated space. VR is proposed as a way to repeat scenarios more often and at lower cost.
A 2023 systematic review in Resuscitation Plus examined 34 studies published between 1998 and 2022. They covered emergency medicine, equipment training, obstetrics and life support, across medical, nursing and allied health staff. The reviewers concluded that VR may bring educational benefit, including knowledge gain and retention, skill performance, acceptability and usability. Participants valued the realism and the ability to replay scenarios.
The same review is clear about what is missing: the educational gains were not matched by changes in patient outcomes, and there is not enough evidence to show cost-effectiveness.
What makes VR training work
A 2026 systematic review in JMIR XR and Spatial Computing asked a narrower question: among qualified emergency staff using headsets, which ways of delivering VR training work best? Of 3,528 articles screened, only six met its criteria.
- Appeared to help: taking an active part in the scenario instead of watching, and training close to the time the skill is needed.
- No clear advantage: game-style features, stronger feedback prompts, or having an educator present in the virtual space.
With so few studies, these are pointers, not rules.
Remote guidance with AR
Emergency medicine is one of the specialties where AR has most often been tested for real-time remote support, with a specialist guiding the person on scene. That research is covered in our guide to augmented and virtual reality in telemedicine.
Limits of the evidence
- Learning, not outcomes: studies measure what trainees know and can do in a simulation.
- Cost: often given as a reason to adopt VR, but not yet demonstrated.
- Mixed measures: studies use different outcomes, which makes them hard to combine.
Questions to ask
- Which skills will VR cover, and which still need hands-on simulation?
- Will trainees take an active role in each scenario?
- How will we tell whether it changes performance at work?
Related guide: virtual reality in medical training.
Common questions
Does VR training work for emergency medicine?
A review of 34 studies found likely gains in knowledge, retention and skill performance. It did not find evidence of improved patient outcomes.
Is VR training cheaper than traditional simulation?
That is often claimed but not yet shown. The 2023 review found insufficient evidence of cost-effectiveness.
What makes VR emergency training more effective?
A 2026 review of six studies suggests that taking an active part in the scenario, and training close to when the skill is needed, both help. Game-style features showed no clear advantage.
Sources
- Abbas JR, et al. Virtual reality in simulation-based emergency skills training: A systematic review with a narrative synthesis. Resuscitation Plus, 2023.
- Costa M, et al. Different Delivery Modalities of Virtual Reality Training in Emergency Medicine: Systematic Review. JMIR XR and Spatial Computing, 2026.
