Leveraging virtual reality to enhance laboratory safety and security inspection training

1 Introduction

Laboratory inspection is an essential good practice component of a comprehensive laboratory safety and security program at the National University of Singapore (NUS) (DeLaHunt, 2005; Ezenwa et al., 2022; Foster, 2004; Lestari et al., 2016; Rengarajan, 2012). Periodic laboratory inspections take a three-pronged approach: they minimise risks, ensure that the laboratories comply with local regulations, and raise safety and security awareness across the different faculties. The periodic laboratory inspection is conducted at four different levels within the university (Figure 1). The first level of laboratory inspection is conducted by the safety lead and/or the Principal Investigator (PI) of the laboratory group. The second level and third level of laboratory inspection is conducted by the department safety team and the university safety and health team, namely the NUS Office of Risk Management & Compliance (ORMC) respectively. The last level of laboratory inspection is conducted by the top management of NUS, namely the NUS President, to show the commitment and support for a safe and secure working environment.

Figure 1:

Hierarchy of laboratory inspection visit.

In order to achieve the objectives of the laboratory inspection, it is essential for the laboratory inspectors to have a good level of understanding of safe laboratory operation and knowledge of safety hazards (Terpin, 2019). Given the complex and diverse nature of safety hazards in NUS research laboratories, it is imperative that we develop a comprehensive training module for laboratory inspection. This module will equip our laboratory inspectors with the skills to identify potential safety hazards, ensuring a proactive approach towards achieving the best practice of safety and compliance (Ezenwa et al., 2022).

Beyond the safety aspects, periodic laboratory inspection also plays an important role in chemical security. Together they form an integral chemical risk management (Straut & Nelson, 2020). There are five pillars of chemical security, namely physical protection, material control and accountability, information security, personnel security, and transport security (Payne et al., 2020; Straut & Nelson, 2020). Each pillar is key in implementing a chemical security risk management system. The recommended good practice for chemical security is to conduct periodic physical inspections (Payne et al., 2020; Straut & Nelson, 2020; Uy, 2011). A more thorough periodic laboratory inspection and monitoring can help to ensure and maintain the security of the physical infrastructure, raise awareness of a potential malevolent act, increase accountability for securing chemicals and equipment on site, and prevent the accumulation of orphan chemicals (Lee et al., 2018; Straut & Nelson, 2020). Essentially, a periodic laboratory inspection can play an important role in deterrence. Hence, this shows the importance of developing a training module on laboratory inspection to better equip our laboratory inspector with the knowledge and skills to identify both potential safety hazards and security risks.

2 Background

The current training methodology for laboratory inspection in NUS is conducted through the methodology of on-the-job training. The University Safety and Health Officers (SHOs) from the NUS Office of Risk Management and Compliance will accompany the Department Safety and Health Co-ordinators (SHCs) for multiple rounds of laboratory inspection to visit the different laboratories within their department. However, different NUS departments or research laboratories have different types of hazards based on their research objectives. This may result in some hazards, such as ergonomics and electrical, not being covered during the training session as the hazard may not be prevalent in that specific department. The hazards that can be spotted are also heavily dependent on the safety performance of the laboratory at the time the training is conducted (Fun Man, 2016). Therefore, the Safety, Health, and Environment (SHE) trainers will need to borrow laboratory space to simulate the hazards for every training lesson. However, this can be time-consuming and disruptive to the researchers as this requires time and logistical space to facilitate a comprehensive laboratory inspection training session. Therefore, with such limitations, we explored other avenues or devices that are readily available for NUS staff or student to leverage on – Computers and/or smartphones (Lim et al., 2017) (Figure 2).

Figure 2:

Participant(s) undergoing the VR experience using the device of (a) laptop (b) Tablet.

3 Virtual reality for laboratory inspection

The use of immersive technology, such as Virtual Reality (VR), has been introduced in many fields, such as education and construction (Flerlage et al., 2023; Fung et al., 2019; Han & Fung, 2024; Jelonek et al., 2022; Kader et al., 2020; Viitaharju et al., 2021). In the field of safety and health, VR training takes place in immersive virtual environments that allow users to experience safety hazards without retrospective learning based on real accidents (Brown et al., 2021; Jelonek et al., 2022). As compared to the conventional teaching method, such as hands-on practice and theoretical safety workshops, several studies have demonstrated the benefits of VR training, especially that VR can replicate an accident or near-miss immersive experience, allow the participants to have increased attention and knowledge acquisition (Brown et al., 2021; Jelonek et al., 2022).

Currently, many different types of VR development and implementation platforms are available. For example, some VR development platforms, such as Unity or Stream VR, require instructors to be proficient in computer coding (Freina & Ott, 2015; Murray, 2017). Furthermore, some VR implementations require the use of a VR headset and wired setup to the computers (Kader et al., 2020). Nevertheless, the utilisation of such VR development and implementation platforms may be limited due to the lack in proficiency in computer coding and the high cost of the headset (Brown et al., 2021; Kader et al., 2020). In this project, we developed a low immersive VR training module using web-based VR software, namely Uptale, as recommended by NUS Information Technology (IT) department to overcome the technical limitations of coding, cost of implementing and minimise the difficulties of integrating the VR training into our Learning Management System (LMS). The web-based VR, Uptale, requires no prior coding programming knowledge, does not require a headset to create an immersive virtual experience and can be easily integrated into our NUS LMS.

The first step towards the development of VR laboratory inspection training is to demonstrate a proof of concept that using a form of low immersive medium, namely accessing the VR using a laptop or tablet, can help to enhance the learning experience of laboratory inspection in NUS (Makransky et al., 2019). With the use of immersive VR technology, SHE trainees can have an immersive experience of the laboratory to conduct a VR laboratory inspection to interact, identify and understand the different hazards, such as chemical safety, in the laboratory to learn and refresh at their own time and pace, akin to being physically at the real laboratory scene (Brown et al., 2021; Kader et al., 2020). Furthermore, the experience can be further enhanced with a pair of VR glasses to have an even higher immersive experience of the laboratory inspection (Kader et al., 2020). As such, these immersive VR laboratory scenes allow students to be spatially aware of their environment (Figure 3). Instead of solely relying on the use of photographs, which offer limited and disjointed views of the environment (Ardisara & Fung, 2018).

Figure 3:

360° photosphere view of NUS laboratory bench taken with Insta360 camera.

4 Objectives

Herein, we employed WebVR software, namely Uptale, to design an immersive virtual reality (VR) laboratory inspection training module (Uptale I The Enterprise Immersive Learning Solution). There are two main objectives of the VR training on laboratory inspection. Firstly, VR training allows the standardisation of the trainees’ learning outcomes and laboratory inspection practice across the different departments and research laboratories. The second objective is to create an immersive VR training to train and equip NUS SHCs better to conduct laboratory inspection.

5 Methodology

We adopt a systematic approach to develop VR training for laboratory inspection (Figure 4). The first stage is to determine the pedagogical framework. We added the element of discovery in the pedagogical framework for our laboratory inspection training. The user has to find and discover the location of the hidden hazard, as depicted in Figure 5a and Figure 5c, where the tag is hidden. Only by discovering the tag and identifying the hazard the user can then earn points. Uptale also has another function, which is generating a heat map. This allows the trainer to understand and pinpoint which hazard has a lesser discovery percentage by the user. Hence, the trainer can create a focused awareness of the specific less identified hazard and share it with the university through circulars. This pedagogical framework in the VR laboratory inspection is similar to the RAMP chemical safety pedagogy, which recognises the hazards, assesses risks, minimises risks and prepares for emergencies, and can be further expanded to cover the areas of chemical risk management (Finster, 2021; Limpanuparb et al., 2021). The second stage is to construct a storyboard to plan the type of hazards, filming location and educational content. The third stage is to plan the experience map by breaking down the story into steps and sequences. The next stage is to plan the interactive tags or functions for the VR experience. The fifth stage is to employ an Insta360 camera and mobile application to take multiple 360° pictures and videos of the different rooms of the laboratory to construct scenes with different types of hazards. The last stage is to create content using the Uptale platform.

Figure 4:

A systematic approach to creating the VR training content.

Figure 5:

Examples of hazards planted during the video shooting of the VR laboratory shooting session (a) Laboratory bench (with no interactive tags embedded) (b) Laboratory bench (with interactive tags embedded) (c) Chemical cabinet (with no interactive tags embedded) (d) Chemical cabinet (with interactive tags embedded).

The VR training on laboratory inspection was constructed upon a mixed reality, where real-world elements are incorporated into a VR laboratory scene using the web-based VR software Uptale (Figure 5). Uptale is an immersive learning platform interface that creates VR experiences and tracks users’ data within the experience. The interface of Uptale allows users to easily create their own VR experiences without any prior coding knowledge. Using the Uptale WebVR platform, we embedded different interactive tags, such as hidden tags (that present further information about a hazard) and door tags (that transport participants into different scenes). The interactive function of the door tag to transport to the different areas of the laboratory allows this training module to be comprehensive, where it allows the participants to better observe different types of hazards in different settings, such as chemical storage area or chemical fume hood, so that a more comprehensive understanding of the chemical risk management is incorporated into the VR training (Kader et al., 2020).

The main feature that our virtual reality training employed is Finding a list of items, which can help the user keep track of the number of hazards that the user has found by changing the text from blue to green when the hazard has been identified (Figure 5d). This feature can be used simultaneously with the Items to Click feature (Table 1). After identifying the item, a coloured circle will appear. A red circle indicates a hazard and a green circle indicate a good practice, such as using a compliance electrical plug. The third feature is choosing the correct order, where the user must choose the correct order to doff the personal protection equipment (PPE) to reduce the risk of contamination. After the correct order has been chosen, a 2D video will appear to demonstrate the correct order to doff the PPE (Figure 6). The most exciting and interactive feature is the 3D object. In our training, the user can pick up the 3D object. Specifically, the acetic acid bottle was placed in the wrong location. The user must understand that acetic acid has dual chemical hazards, namely corrosive and flammable. Hence, the user has to pick up the acetic acid bottle and place it in the correct location in the flammable cabinet.

In total, there are 15 scenes, ranging from the laboratory entrance to the personal protection equipment (PPE) gowning area to the laboratory bench to the chemical fume hood and chemical storage area. It should be noted that certain hazards or close-up images of the hazard are viewable only if the participants hover the mouse-click around the hazard. For example, the key located at the cabinet lock may be too small for the camera resolution. Hence, a close-up image of the key at the cabinet lock will pop out after the user has identified the potential chemical security risk (Figure 7).

Figure 6:

An example of a scene at PPE gowning area (a) Quiz to select the appropriate PPE to don in the laboratory (b) Embedded video to demonstrate the process of donning PPE.

The VR training begins at the laboratory entrance, where the participants will be briefed about the scenario and the objectives of laboratory inspection training. The door tag to the next scene is hidden and will only appear after the participants are able to identify some of the hazards. A “Quick-Tip” tag will pop up one  minute into the scene to provide clues about each hazard to help the participants identify the hazards. After identifying each hazard, the VR training video will explain how the hazard could cause harm, and the regulations associated with the hazard. After the trainees have completed viewing the different scenes, the trainees are able to re-visit all the scenes to revise and learn about the hazards that they did not manage to identify during their first attempt.

Figure 7:

An example of a potential chemical security risk planted to demonstrate the improper method of securing chemical.

Figure 8:

Example of a quiz embedded in a scene to ascertain the knowledge of laboratory inspectors about the frequency of checking the eyewash and emergency shower.

Quizzes are embedded in different scenes to ascertain the knowledge of laboratory inspectors (Figure 8).

6 Results and discussion

Participants were equipped with their personal laptops and mobile devices to undergo the VR training. The duration of the VR training lasted between 20 and 30  minutes, depending on the ability of each user to identify the hazards. At the end of the VR laboratory inspection training, the participants were asked a series of questions to gather their feedback to validate the effectiveness of the VR laboratory inspection training. Pertaining to the survey questions, the participants were asked to rate a statement presented to them on a 10-point Likert scale (Figures 9 and 10).

Figure 9:

Survey results of laboratory inspection virtual reality (VR) Training module (a) Have you taken any VR training before? (b) The online training system is user friendly. Rating 1–10 – from least favourable to most favourable (n = 10).

Figure 10:

Survey results of laboratory inspection virtual reality (VR) Training module (a) Overall, is the course effective? (b) Would you recommend others to try the lab safety VR training? Rating 1–10 – from least favourable to most favourable (n = 10).

Prior to this VR training, 62.5 % of the participants had never taken any form of VR training before, while the other 37.5 % had tried the VR training, namely My Virtual Lab, by our NUS IT (Figure 9a). Hence, this may explain why 50.0 % of the participants rated the VR training user-friendliness between 5 and 7 out of 10 (Figure 9b). We noted that one of the main challenges that the participants faced was counterintuitive to the scrolling of scenes to view the 360° environment on the computer screen. A small number of participants gave feedback that they may feel dizzy when they scroll the mouse too fast to move rapidly across the screen. This may be attributed to the fact that they had never taken any form of VR training before.

Overall, 87.5 % of the participants rated the effectiveness of VR training with a score of 9 and above, indicating that the participants found the VR training effective (Figure 10a). Overall, the survey indicated that the participants are receptive to the VR training and would recommend others to try the VR laboratory inspection experience.

However, it is worth noting that at this current juncture, VR training in NUS has been introduced as complementary training. Before the first laboratory inspection, the trainees will get a feel for lab inspections. After the first lesson, they can revisit the VR training as a refresher to recap what they have learnt.

7 Conclusions

Through the lens of VR, we have developed an immersive VR experience to better train and equip NUS SHCs. The adoption of VR for our laboratory inspection allows the university to standardise the trainees’ learning outcomes and the laboratory inspection practice for all NUS SHCs. With the VR laboratory inspection training module showing success in transiting from on-the-job-training directly to VR, other safety training modules, such as chemical spill response, may be transformed from PowerPoint slides to VR and introduced to other NUS staff, such as SH committee members, who may also participate in safety inspections.