Meghan M Ahern1, Lindsay V Dean1, Carolyn C Stoddard1, Aakriti Agrawal1, Kimin Kim1, Chad E Cook2, Alessandra Narciso Garcia3. 1. Duke University, Division of Physical Therapy, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 2. Duke University, Division of Physical Therapy, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 3. Duke University, Division of Physical Therapy, Duke Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Virtual reality (VR) technologies have been shown to be beneficial in various areas of healthcare; to date, there are no systematic reviews examining the effectiveness of VR technology for the treatment of spinal pain. PURPOSE: To investigate the effectiveness of VR technology in the management of individuals with acute, subacute, and chronic spinal pain. METHODS: Six electronic databases were searched until November 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of VR were eligible for inclusion. Two independent reviewers extracted the data, assessed the risk of bias for each study and the overall quality of evidence. Mean differences of outcomes were pooled as appropriate using random-effects models. RESULTS: Seven RCTs of high risk of bias met review criteria. Quality of evidence ranged from very low to low quality. In patients with chronic neck pain, VR improved GPE, satisfaction, and general health at short-term follow-up and general health and balance at intermediate-term follow up compared to kinematic training. VR improved pain intensity and disability at short-term and long-term follow-up compared to conventional proprioceptive training in patients with chronic neck pain. In patients with either subacute or chronic low back pain (LBP), VR improved pain, disability, and fear of movement compared to lumbar stabilization exercises and pain compared to conventional physical therapy (at short-term follow-up). In patients with chronic LBP, VR improved pain compared to lumbar stabilization exercises and fear of movement compared to conventional physical therapy (at short-term follow-up). CONCLUSION: VR's potential for improvement in outcomes for spinal pain that demonstrated statistical and/or clinical significance (pain intensity, disability, fear of movement, GPE, patient satisfaction, general health status, and balance) highlights the need for more focused, higher-quality research on efficacy and effectiveness of VR for treatment of patients with spinal pain. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Virtual reality (VR) technologies have been shown to be beneficial in various areas of healthcare; to date, there are no systematic reviews examining the effectiveness of VR technology for the treatment of spinal pain. PURPOSE: To investigate the effectiveness of VR technology in the management of individuals with acute, subacute, and chronic spinal pain. METHODS: Six electronic databases were searched until November 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of VR were eligible for inclusion. Two independent reviewers extracted the data, assessed the risk of bias for each study and the overall quality of evidence. Mean differences of outcomes were pooled as appropriate using random-effects models. RESULTS: Seven RCTs of high risk of bias met review criteria. Quality of evidence ranged from very low to low quality. In patients with chronic neck pain, VR improved GPE, satisfaction, and general health at short-term follow-up and general health and balance at intermediate-term follow up compared to kinematic training. VR improved pain intensity and disability at short-term and long-term follow-up compared to conventional proprioceptive training in patients with chronic neck pain. In patients with either subacute or chronic low back pain (LBP), VR improved pain, disability, and fear of movement compared to lumbar stabilization exercises and pain compared to conventional physical therapy (at short-term follow-up). In patients with chronic LBP, VR improved pain compared to lumbar stabilization exercises and fear of movement compared to conventional physical therapy (at short-term follow-up). CONCLUSION: VR's potential for improvement in outcomes for spinal pain that demonstrated statistical and/or clinical significance (pain intensity, disability, fear of movement, GPE, patient satisfaction, general health status, and balance) highlights the need for more focused, higher-quality research on efficacy and effectiveness of VR for treatment of patients with spinal pain. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Entities:
Keywords:
Back pain; Cervical pain; Low back pain; Physical therapy; Virtual reality
Authors: Laura Garcia; Brandon Birckhead; Parthasarathy Krishnamurthy; Ian Mackey; Josh Sackman; Vafi Salmasi; Robert Louis; Carina Castro; Roselani Maddox; Todd Maddox; Beth D Darnall Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2022-05-25 Impact factor: 7.076
Authors: Lisa Goudman; Julie Jansen; Maxime Billot; Nieke Vets; Ann De Smedt; Manuel Roulaud; Philippe Rigoard; Maarten Moens Journal: JMIR Serious Games Date: 2022-05-10 Impact factor: 3.364
Authors: Giacomo Rossettini; Andrea Colombi; Elisa Carlino; Mattia Manoni; Mattia Mirandola; Andrea Polli; Eleonora Maria Camerone; Marco Testa Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2022-03-16
Authors: Beatriz Brea-Gómez; Irene Torres-Sánchez; Araceli Ortiz-Rubio; Andrés Calvache-Mateo; Irene Cabrera-Martos; Laura López-López; Marie Carmen Valenza Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-11-11 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Francesco Cerritelli; Marco Chiera; Marco Abbro; Valentino Megale; Jorge Esteves; Alberto Gallace; Andrea Manzotti Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-06-30 Impact factor: 4.003