Skip to main content
. 2025 Aug 22;15:30886. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-16227-7

Table 1.

General characteristics and virtual reality simulation access data of the respondents.

Number of respondents 170
Number of countries 26
Gender (Female/Male/Other), n (%) 86 (50.5%)/ 83 (48.8%)/ 1 (0.7%)
Age, mean [Min-Max] 34.1 +/- 8.8 [24–63]
Senior Surgeons (%) 41 (24%)
Fellows (%) 24 (14%)
Residents (%) 104 (61%)
Year of residency, median [Min-Max] 3 [1–7]
Previous use of eye surgery virtual reality simulator, n (%):
EyeSi 136 (80%)
CAT courseware, n (% of EyeSi users) 127 (93%)
VRT courseware, n (% of EyeSi users) 61 (45%)
HelpMeSee 82 (48%)
MSICS module, n (% of HelpMeSee users) 65 (79%)
Phacoemulsification module, n (% of HelpMeSee users) 26 (32%)
Complications module, n (% of HelpMeSee users) 26 (62%)
Suturing module, n (% of HelpMeSee users) 22 (27%)
MOST module, n (% of HelpMeSee users) 10 (12%)
Other 17 (10%)
Alcon fidelis 11 (6.4%)
Meta Fundamental VR 1 (0.6%)
Multiple simulators use, n(%) 61 (36%)
EyeSi and HelpMeSee, n (% of multiple users) 55 (32%)
EyeSi and Other, n (% of multiple users) 6 (3.5%)
HelpMeSee and Other, n (% of multiple users) 0
Simulator accessible in, n(%) :
University Hospital 74 (43.5%)
Private simulation center 32 (18.8%)
Other city/ country (need to travel to) 21 (12.4%)
Foundation or association 18 (10.6%)
Faculty of medicine 14 (8.2%)
Industrial facility 4 (2.4%)
Ophthalmology society (ESCRS or other) 6 (3.5%)
Years of access to the simulator, mean +/- SD 3.6 +/- 3.8 years
Surgical license required in center, n (%) 43 (25%)

CAT: cataract; VRT: vitreoretinal; MOST : Mechanics of Ophthalmic Surgery – Tools, Tissues and Thoughts; MSICS, Manual Small Incision Cataract Surgery.