We aimed to analyze the degree of usability of two augmented reality applications and to compare the academic performance between the control group and the experimental group at the Universities of Cádiz and Málaga. The students at the University of Málaga used the Zapworks augmented reality software, while those at the University of Cádiz used the Aumentaty augmented reality software for their respective experimental groups. The secondary objective was to measure the relationships between all the studied variables.
Methods: This was a quasi-experimental design with a posttest as the only evaluation measure. We followed the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) statement and the ethical and legal aspects of the Principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. An intervention was carried out using two augmented reality applications on the subject of General Procedures in Physiotherapy II at the Universities of Málaga and Cádiz.
Results: A total of 199 participants took part in the study. Demographic variables, ratings, and usability were assessed, followed by statistical analysis, with the results and their interpretation being described in the study. Significant differences (P<.001) were found in the ratings at both the universities. In addition, significant differences (P<.001) were found between the experimental group and the control group. Regarding the degree of usability in the univariate analysis, no significant differences were found (P=.049). A multiple regression analysis of the rating and usability was performed. The rating showed significant differences, with a beta of 1.4 (P<.001), and usability was also significant (P=.03) in favor of the Aumentaty group.Conclusions: Significant differences were observed in those who used augmented reality compared to the control group, with higher values observed in the University of Cádiz. There are no correlations between the variables of usability and qualifications.
