Patients perceptions of virtual reality therapy in the management of chronic cancer pain.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Garrett BM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7226660 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundVirtual reality (VR) is a computer technology that immerses a user in a completely different reality. The application of VR in acute pain settings is well established. However, in chronic pain, the applications and outcome parameters influenced by VR are less clear.ObjectiveThis review aimed to systematically identify all outcome parameters that are reported in relation to VR in patients with chronic pain.MethodsA total of 4 electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase) were searched for relevant studies. Multilevel random-effect meta-analyses were performed, whereby the standardized mean difference was chosen as the effect size to denote the difference between measurements before and after a VR intervention.ResultsThe initial database search identified 1430 studies, of which 41 (2.87%) were eventually included in the systematic review. Evidence has been found for the effects of VR on pain, functioning, mobility, functional capacity, psychological outcomes, quality of life, neuropsychological outcomes, and physical sensations. The overall effect size (a total of 194 effect sizes from 25 studies) based on a three level meta-analysis was estimated at 1.22 (95% CI 0.55-1.89; z=3.56; P<.001), in favor of improvements after a VR intervention. When categorizing effect sizes, the overall effect sizes were reported as follows: 1.60 (95% CI 0.83-2.36; z=4.09; P<.001) for the effect of VR on pain (n=31), 1.40 (95% CI 0.13-2.67; z=2.17; P=.03) for functioning (n=60), 0.49 (95% CI -0.71 to 1.68; z=0.80; P=.42) for mobility (n=24), and 0.34 (95% CI -1.52 to 2.20; z=0.36; P=.72) for functional capacity (n=21).ConclusionsThis systematic review revealed a broad range of outcome variables influenced by an intervention of VR technology, with statistically significant pain relief and improvements in functioning. These findings indicate that VR not only has applications in acute pain management but also in chronic pain settings, whereby VR might be able to become a promising first-line intervention as complementary therapy for patients with chronic pain.Trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42021227016; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=227016.
| S-EPMC9131143 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with cancer commonly experience acute and/or chronic moderate to severe pain related to disease, treatment, or both. While pain management strategies typically focus on drug therapies, non-pharmacological interventions may prove beneficial without risk of significant clinical side effects or contraindications. One novel strategy, virtual reality, has been shown to improve pain control in addition to usual pharmacological interventions.MethodsThis is a prospective, two-armed, single center randomized controlled study of a virtual reality intervention in 128 hospitalized subjects with cancer reporting pain rated at least 4/10 compared to an active control intervention, two-dimensional guided imagery. The primary outcome is change in self-reported pain score. Secondary end points include changes in self-reported distress, quality of life, and satisfaction with pain management. We will also explore patient preferences for distraction therapy content and themes through quantitative analysis of survey data, semi-structured interviews, and a collaging exercise.ConclusionThis randomized controlled study aims to provide empiric data to support application and expansion of novel technologies such as virtual reality to augment usual pharmacological pain management strategies in hospitalized patients with cancer.
| S-EPMC8800065 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundToday immersive environments such as Virtual Reality (VR) offer new opportunities for serious gaming in exercise therapy and psychoeducation. Chronic back pain (CBP) patients could benefit from exergames in VR. The requirements in older CBP patients for a VR pain therapy have not yet been determined in studies. The aim of the study was to perform a requirements analysis for the user group of geriatric patients with CBP for a VR exergame. The objective was to find out the expectations, desires, preferences and barriers in order to collect them as requirements for this vulnerable group and to determine frameworks of therapy by physiotherapists and psychotherapists.MethodsWe conducted a requirements analysis through semi-structured interviews with 10 elderly participants with CBP. Furthermore, two focus groups were conducted with three physiotherapists and two psychotherapists to determine frameworks of therapy programs for the target group. The qualitative data were transcribed and examined through a structuring content analysis. Subsequently, the results of the analysis were prioritized by all participants of the study.ResultsThe results of the requirements analysis indicate mandatory requirements for the overall system, hardware, software and gamification elements. The key requirements were target-group-specific applications of the VR exergame through e.g. individual briefing, user-friendly handling, inclusion of movement limitations, presentation of everyday scenarios in combination with biofeedback, age-appropriate feedback through praise and awards and a maximum exercise duration of 30 min and 15 min of relaxation.ConclusionIt should be possible to use the determined requirements productively to create user-friendly VR exergames that motivate elderly chronic back pain patients to perform exercises regularly.Trial registrationThe study is registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS-ID: DRKS00015294 12.10.2018).
| S-EPMC7523056 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVirtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) interventions are emerging as promising tools in the treatment of pediatric chronic pain conditions. However, in this young field, there is little consensus to guide the process of engaging in the development and evaluation of targeted VR-based interventions.ObjectiveThe INOVATE-Pain (Interdisciplinary Network on Virtual and Augmented Technologies for Pain management) consortium aims to advance the field of VR for pediatric chronic pain rehabilitation by providing guidance for best practices in the design, evaluation, and dissemination of VR-based interventions targeting this population.MethodsAn interdisciplinary meeting of 16 academics, clinicians, industry partners, and philanthropy partners was held in January 2020.ResultsReviewing the state of the field, the consortium identified important directions for research-driven innovation in VR and AR clinical care, highlighted key opportunities and challenges facing the field, and established a consensus on best methodological practices to adopt in future efforts to advance the research and practice of VR and AR in pediatric pain. The consortium also identified important next steps to undertake to continue to advance the work in this promising new area of digital health pain interventions.ConclusionsTo realize the promise of this realm of innovation, key ingredients for success include productive partnerships among industry, academic, and clinical stakeholders; a uniform set of outcome domains and measures for standardized evaluation; and widespread access to the latest opportunities, tools, and resources. The INOVATE-Pain collaborative hopes to promote the creation, rigorous yet efficient evaluation, and dissemination of innovative VR-based interventions to reduce pain and improve quality of life for children.
| S-EPMC8111507 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The treatment of chronic pain could benefit from additional non-opioid interventions. Virtual reality (VR) has been shown to be effective in decreasing pain for procedural or acute pain but to date there have been few studies on its use in chronic pain. The present study was an investigation of the impact of a virtual reality application for chronic pain. Thirty (30) participants with various chronic pain conditions were offered a five-minute session using a virtual reality application called Cool! Participants were asked about their pain using a 0-10 visual analog scale rating before the VR session, during the session and immediately after the session. They were also asked about immersion into the VR world and about possible side effects. Pain was reduced from pre-session to post-session by 33%. Pain was reduced from pre-session during the VR session by 60%. These changes were both statistically significant at the p < .001 level. Three participants (10%) reported no change between pre and post pain ratings. Ten participants (33%) reported complete pain relief while doing the virtual reality session. All participants (100%) reported a decrease in pain to some degree between pre-session pain and during-session pain. The virtual reality experience was found here to provide a significant amount of pain relief. A head mounted display (HMD) was used with all subjects and no discomfort was experienced. Only one participant noted any side effects. VR seems to have promise as a non-opioid treatment for chronic pain and further investigation is warranted.
| S-EPMC5172565 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Virtual reality (VR) has emerged as a novel and effective non-pharmacologic therapy for pain, and there is growing interest to use VR in the acute hospital setting. We sought to explore the cost and effectiveness thresholds VR therapy must meet to be cost-saving as an inpatient pain management program. The result is a framework for hospital administrators to evaluate the return on investment of implementing inpatient VR programs of varying effectiveness and cost. Utilizing decision analysis software, we compared adjuvant VR therapy for pain management vs. usual care among hospitalized patients. In the VR strategy, we analyzed potential cost-savings from reductions in opioid utilization and hospital length of stay (LOS), as well as increased reimbursements from higher patient satisfaction as measured by the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey. The average overall hospitalization cost-savings per patient for the VR program vs. usual care was $5.39 (95% confidence interval -$11.00 to $156.17). In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis across 1000 hypothetical hospitals of varying size and staffing, VR remained cost-saving in 89.2% of trials. The VR program was cost-saving so long as it reduced LOS by ?14.6%; the model was not sensitive to differences in opioid use or HCAHPS. We conclude that inpatient VR therapy may be cost-saving for a hospital system primarily if it reduces LOS. In isolation, cost-savings from reductions in opioid utilization and increased HCAHPS-related reimbursements are not sufficient to overcome the costs of VR.
| S-EPMC6550142 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImprovements in software and design and reduction in cost have made virtual reality (VR) a practical tool for immersive, three-dimensional (3D), multisensory experiences that distract patients from painful stimuli.ObjectiveThe objective of the study was to measure the impact of a onetime 3D VR intervention versus a two-dimensional (2D) distraction video for pain in hospitalized patients.MethodsWe conducted a comparative cohort study in a large, urban teaching hospital in medical inpatients with an average pain score of ≥3/10 from any cause. Patients with nausea, vomiting, dementia, motion sickness, stroke, seizure, and epilepsy and those placed in isolation were excluded. Patients in the intervention cohort viewed a 3D VR experience designed to reduce pain using the Samsung Gear Oculus VR headset; control patients viewed a high-definition, 2D nature video on a 14-inch bedside screen. Pre- and postintervention pain scores were recorded. Difference-in-difference scores and the proportion achieving a half standard deviation pain response were compared between groups.ResultsThere were 50 subjects per cohort (N=100). The mean pain reduction in the VR cohort was greater than in controls (-1.3 vs -0.6 points, respectively; P=.008). A total of 35 (65%) patients in the VR cohort achieved a pain response versus 40% of controls (P=.01; number needed to treat=4). No adverse events were reported from VR.ConclusionsUse of VR in hospitalized patients significantly reduces pain versus a control distraction condition. These results indicate that VR is an effective and safe adjunctive therapy for pain management in the acute inpatient setting; future randomized trials should confirm benefit with different visualizations and exposure periods.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02456987; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02456987 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6pJ1P644S).
| S-EPMC5390112 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTherapeutic virtual reality (VR) has emerged as an effective, drug-free tool for pain management, but there is a lack of randomized, controlled data evaluating its effectiveness in hospitalized patients. We sought to measure the impact of on-demand VR versus "health and wellness" television programming for pain in hospitalized patients.MethodsWe performed a prospective, randomized, comparative effectiveness trial in hospitalized patients with an average pain score of ≥3 out of 10 points. Patients in the experimental group received a library of 21 VR experiences administered using the Samsung Gear Oculus headset; control patients viewed specialized television programming to promote health and wellness. Clinical staff followed usual care; study interventions were not protocolized. The primary outcome was patient-reported pain using a numeric rating scale, as recorded by nursing staff during usual care. Pre- and post-intervention pain scores were compared immediately after initial treatment and after 48- and 72-hours.ResultsThere were 120 subjects (61 VR; 59 control). The mean within-subject difference in immediate pre- and post-intervention pain scores was larger in the VR group (-1.72 points; SD 3.56) than in the control group (-0.46 points; SD 3.01); this difference was significant in favor of VR (P < .04). When limited to the subgroup of patients with severe baseline pain (≥7 points), the effect of VR was more pronounced vs. control (-3.04, SD 3.75 vs. -0.93, SD 2.16 points; P = .02). In regression analyses adjusting for pre-intervention pain, time, age, gender, and type of pain, VR yielded a .59 (P = .03) and .56 (P = .04) point incremental reduction in pain versus control during the 48- and 72-hour post-intervention periods, respectively.ConclusionsVR significantly reduces pain versus an active control condition in hospitalized patients. VR is most effective for severe pain. Future trials should evaluate standardized order sets that interpose VR as an early non-drug option for analgesia.
| S-EPMC6693733 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Children must often endure painful procedures as part of their treatment for various medical conditions. Those with chronic pain endure frequent or constant discomfort in their daily lives, sometimes severely limiting their physical capacities. With the advent of affordable consumer-grade equipment, clinicians have access to a promising and engaging intervention for pediatric pain, both acute and chronic. In addition to providing relief from acute and procedural pain, virtual reality (VR) may also help to provide a corrective psychological and physiological environment to facilitate rehabilitation for pediatric patients suffering from chronic pain. The special qualities of VR such as presence, interactivity, customization, social interaction, and embodiment allow it to be accepted by children and adolescents and incorporated successfully into their existing medical therapies. However, the powerful and transformative nature of many VR experiences may also pose some risks and should be utilized with caution. In this paper, we review recent literature in pediatric virtual reality for procedural pain and anxiety, acute and chronic pain, and some rehabilitation applications. We also discuss the practical considerations of using VR in pediatric care, and offer specific suggestions and information for clinicians wishing to adopt these engaging therapies into their daily clinical practice.
| S-EPMC5532544 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Attentional distraction from pain has been shown to be largely ineffective for obtaining a hypoalgesic effect in patients with chronic pain when compared to a control condition. It has been hypothesized that this may be due to the non-engaging types of distraction that have been used so far. Moreover, it is suggested that the hypoalgesic effects of distraction may be attenuated by pain-related cognitions and emotions, as they may increase the attention to pain. METHODS:In this randomized controlled trial, patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain in the intervention group (n?=?42) performed a single exercise session with nonimmersive VR games, while those in the control group (n?=?42) performed the same exercises without VR games. We investigated whether VR distraction had a hypoalgesic effect during and immediately after the exercises, and whether it reduced the time spent thinking of pain during the exercises. We further explored whether pain-related fear, pain catastrophizing and baseline pain intensity moderated the effects of VR distraction. RESULTS:VR distraction had a hypoalgesic effect during (Cohen's d?=?1.29) and immediately after (Cohen's d?=?0.85) the exercises, and it also reduced the time spent thinking of pain (Cohen's d?=?1.31). Preliminary exploratory analyses showed that pain-related fear, pain catastrophizing and baseline pain intensity did not moderate the effects of VR distraction. CONCLUSIONS:Large effect sizes of VR distraction induced hypoalgesia were observed. This suggests that nonimmersive VR games can be used when it is deemed important to reduce the pain during exercises in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT02679300. This trial was registered on 10 February 2016.
| S-EPMC7178732 | biostudies-literature