PURPOSE:Virtual reality (VR) during chemotherapy has resulted in an elapsed time compression effect, validating the attention diversion capabilities of VR. Using the framework of the pacemaker-accumulator cognitive model of time perception, this study explored the influence of age, gender, state anxiety, fatigue, and cancer diagnosis in predicting the difference between actual time elapsed during receipt of intravenous chemotherapy while immersed in a VR environment versus patient's retrospective estimates of time elapsed during this treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This secondary analysis from three studies yielded a pooled sample of N = 137 participants with breast, lung, or colon cancer. Each study employed a crossover design requiring two matched intravenous chemotherapy treatments, with participants randomly assigned to receive VR during one treatment. Regressions modeled the effect of demographic variables, diagnosis, and Piper Fatigue Scale and State Anxiety Inventory scores on the difference between actual and estimated time elapsed during chemotherapy with VR. RESULTS: In a forward regression model, three predictors (diagnosis, gender, and anxiety) explained a significant portion of the variability for altered time perception (F=5.06, p = 0.0008). Diagnosis was the strongest predictor; individuals with breast and colon cancer perceived time passed more quickly. CONCLUSIONS:VR is a noninvasive intervention that can make chemotherapy treatments more tolerable. Women with breast cancer are more likely and lung cancer patients less likely to experience altered time perception during VR (a possible indicator of effectiveness for this distraction intervention). Understanding factors that predict responses to interventions can help clinicians tailor coping strategies to meet each patient's needs.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Virtual reality (VR) during chemotherapy has resulted in an elapsed time compression effect, validating the attention diversion capabilities of VR. Using the framework of the pacemaker-accumulator cognitive model of time perception, this study explored the influence of age, gender, state anxiety, fatigue, and cancer diagnosis in predicting the difference between actual time elapsed during receipt of intravenous chemotherapy while immersed in a VR environment versus patient's retrospective estimates of time elapsed during this treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This secondary analysis from three studies yielded a pooled sample of N = 137 participants with breast, lung, or colon cancer. Each study employed a crossover design requiring two matched intravenous chemotherapy treatments, with participants randomly assigned to receive VR during one treatment. Regressions modeled the effect of demographic variables, diagnosis, and Piper Fatigue Scale and State Anxiety Inventory scores on the difference between actual and estimated time elapsed during chemotherapy with VR. RESULTS: In a forward regression model, three predictors (diagnosis, gender, and anxiety) explained a significant portion of the variability for altered time perception (F=5.06, p = 0.0008). Diagnosis was the strongest predictor; individuals with breast and colon cancer perceived time passed more quickly. CONCLUSIONS: VR is a noninvasive intervention that can make chemotherapy treatments more tolerable. Women with breast cancer are more likely and lung cancerpatients less likely to experience altered time perception during VR (a possible indicator of effectiveness for this distraction intervention). Understanding factors that predict responses to interventions can help clinicians tailor coping strategies to meet each patient's needs.
Authors: Susan M Schneider; Maryjo Prince-Paul; Mary Jo Allen; Paula Silverman; Deborah Talaba Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2004 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Maarten Hofman; Gary R Morrow; Joseph A Roscoe; Jane T Hickok; Karen M Mustian; Dennis F Moore; James L Wade; Tom R Fitch Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-08-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Albert Rizzo; Thomas D Parsons; Belinda Lange; Patrick Kenny; John G Buckwalter; Barbara Rothbaum; JoAnn Difede; John Frazier; Brad Newman; Josh Williams; Greg Reger Journal: J Clin Psychol Med Settings Date: 2011-06
Authors: Rosa M Baños; Macarena Espinoza; Azucena García-Palacios; José M Cervera; Gaspar Esquerdo; Enrique Barrajón; Cristina Botella Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-06-13 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Karin Tanja-Dijkstra; Sabine Pahl; Mathew P White; Jackie Andrade; Jon May; Robert J Stone; Malcolm Bruce; Ian Mills; Melissa Auvray; Rhys Gabe; David R Moles Journal: Trials Date: 2014-03-22 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Kumar Raghav; A J Van Wijk; Fawzia Abdullah; Md Nurul Islam; Marc Bernatchez; Ad De Jongh Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2016-02-27 Impact factor: 2.757