Dataset Information

Virtual Reality Interventions for Needle-Related Procedural Pain, Fear and Anxiety-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Needle-related procedures are often a source of pain, anxiety and fear in young patients. This systematic review aimed to investigate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) on reducing pain, fear and anxiety in pediatric patients undergoing needle-related procedures. Pain, anxiety, fear, changes in blood pressure and heart rate as well as satisfaction were evaluated as outcomes during needle-related procedures in VR compared with standard care conditions. A meta-analysis was performed, taking into account online databases. Two authors independently conducted literature searches in December 2020. The last search was conducted in March 2021 from a total of 106 records, 7 met our inclusion criteria. One study was excluded from the meta-analysis due to insufficient data. VR was applied as a distractor during venous access. Statistically significant benefits of using VR were shown in children's pain scores, where VR significantly decreased symptoms (n = 3204 patients, MD = -2.85; 95% CI -3.57, -2.14, for the Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale and n = 2240 patients, MD = -0.19; 95% CI -0.58, 0.20, for the Faces Pain Scale-Revised). The analysis of fear, anxiety and satisfaction scores revealed no significant differences between the conditions, as the studies were too heterogeneous to be pooled. Distraction using virtual reality may be an effective intervention for reducing pain in children undergoing needle-related medical procedures. However, further research in the implementation of VR as a distractor for children and adolescents is required, due to the limited research into this field.

SUBMITTER: Czech O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8347054 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Acutely painful procedures are commonplace. Current approaches to pain most often involve pharmacotherapy, however, there is interest in virtual reality (VR) as a non-pharmacological alternative. A methodologically rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis is lacking.Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched the Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ERIC, NIHR Centre for Review and Dissemination, Proquest, the System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to 5 November 2017. Included studies were randomised with an experimental trial design, included a non-VR control group and examined the efficacy of VR with regards to an acutely painful clinical intervention. Bias was assessed along Cochrane guidelines, with performance bias not assessed due to the non-blindable nature of VR. We extracted summary data for maximal pain score and used standard mean difference DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis (RevMan 5.3). This review was prospectively registered (PROSPERO CRD42017058204).Of the 12,450 studies identified, 20 studies were eligible for the systematic review. No trials reported in sufficient detail to judge their risk of bias, and 10 studies were at high risk of bias in at least one domain. 16 studies (9 randomised controlled trials, 7 crossover studies) examining 656 individuals were included in quantitative synthesis. Pain scales were heterogenous, but mostly employed 100-point scales. Across all trials, meta-analysis was suggestive of a -0.49 (95%CI -0.83 to -0.41, p = 0.006) standardised mean difference reduction in pain score with VR. However there was a high degree of statistical heterogeneity (?2 p<0.001, I2 81%, 95%CI for I2 70-88%), driven by randomised studies, with substantial clinical heterogeneity.These data suggest that VR may have a role in acutely painful procedures, however included studies were clinically and statistically heterogenous. Further research is required to validate findings, establish cost efficacy and optimal clinical settings for usage. Future trials should report in accordance with established guidelines.

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.

Project description:BackgroundVirtual reality is increasingly being utilized by clinicians to facilitate analgesia and anxiolysis within an inpatient setting. There is however, a lack of a clinically relevant review to guide its use for this purpose.ObjectiveTo systematically review the current evidence for the efficacy of virtual reality as an analgesic in the management of acute pain and anxiolysis in an inpatient setting.MethodsA comprehensive search was conducted up to and including January 2019 on PubMed, Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Search terms included virtual reality, vr, and pain. Primary articles with a focus on acute pain in the clinical setting were considered for the review. Primary outcome measures included degree of analgesia afforded by virtual reality therapy, degree of anxiolysis afforded by virtual reality therapy, effect of virtual reality on physiological parameters, side effects precipitated by virtual reality, virtual reality content type, and type of equipment utilized.ResultsEighteen studies were deemed eligible for inclusion in this systematic review; 67% (12/18) of studies demonstrated significant reductions in pain with the utilization of virtual reality; 44% (8/18) of studies assessed the effects of virtual reality on procedural anxiety, with 50% (4/8) of these demonstrating significant reductions; 28% (5/18) of studies screened for side effects with incidence rates of 0.5% to 8%; 39% (7/18) of studies evaluated the effects of virtual reality on autonomic arousal as a biomarker of pain, with 29% (2/7) demonstrating significant changes; 100% (18/18) of studies utilized a head mounted display to deliver virtual reality therapy, with 50% being in active form (participants interacting with the environment) and 50% being in passive form (participants observing the content only).ConclusionsAvailable evidence suggests that virtual reality therapy can be applied to facilitate analgesia for acute pain in a variety of inpatient settings. Its effects, however, are likely to vary by patient population and indication. This highlights the need for individualized pilot testing of virtual reality therapy's effects for each specific clinical use case rather than generalizing its use for the broad indication of facilitating analgesia. In addition, virtual reality therapy has the added potential of concurrently providing procedural anxiolysis, thereby improving patient experience and cooperation, while being associated with a low incidence of side effects (nausea, vomiting, eye strain, and dizziness). Furthermore, findings indicated a head mounted display should be utilized to deliver virtual reality therapy in a clinical setting with a slight preference for active over passive virtual reality for analgesia. There, however, appears to be insufficient evidence to substantiate the effect of virtual reality on autonomic arousal, and this should be considered at best to be for investigational uses, at present.

Dataset Information

Virtual Reality Interventions for Needle-Related Procedural Pain, Fear and Anxiety-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets