Robyn J McCahill1, Cate Nagle2, Patricia Clarke3. 1. Emergency Department, Mackay Hospital and Health Service, Mackay Hospital and Health Service, 475 Bridge Rd, Mackay, QLD 4740, Australia. Electronic address: robyn.mccahill@health.qld.gov.au. 2. College of Healthcare Sciences, James Cook University, 1 James Cook Drive, Townsville QLD 4814, Australia. 3. Townsville Hospital & Health Service, 100 Angus Smith Drive, Townsville, QLD 4814, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of this review was to collate, summarise and report evidence on the use of VR as an interventional tool for pain and anxiety management during ED procedures. METHODS: Guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) we searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus and PsychInfo databases, grey literature and reference lists of included studies. RESULTS: From 162 articles, 4 fulfilled the selection criteria and demonstrated VR was effective as an intervention for management of pain and anxiety during ED procedures. The level of evidence was variable: 2 randomised controlled trials (RCT); a descriptive study; and a commentary on a literature review. Participants were aged 4-17 years and the sample sizes were small (n = 20, 59, 64). One RCT compared efficacy of VR to 2 other standard of care (SOC) distractors while the other RCT assessed for VR efficacy and safety. All four articles cited benefits of VR distraction as a procedural intervention in ED. CONCLUSIONS: A small number of studies involving children undergoing needle insertion in ED found VR to be a safe and effective means of managing procedural anxiety, providing a more effective strategy than standard care. Studies with larger samples, involving different procedures and across age groups are required. Crown
BACKGROUND: The objective of this review was to collate, summarise and report evidence on the use of VR as an interventional tool for pain and anxiety management during ED procedures. METHODS: Guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) we searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus and PsychInfo databases, grey literature and reference lists of included studies. RESULTS: From 162 articles, 4 fulfilled the selection criteria and demonstrated VR was effective as an intervention for management of pain and anxiety during ED procedures. The level of evidence was variable: 2 randomised controlled trials (RCT); a descriptive study; and a commentary on a literature review. Participants were aged 4-17 years and the sample sizes were small (n = 20, 59, 64). One RCT compared efficacy of VR to 2 other standard of care (SOC) distractors while the other RCT assessed for VR efficacy and safety. All four articles cited benefits of VR distraction as a procedural intervention in ED. CONCLUSIONS: A small number of studies involving children undergoing needle insertion in ED found VR to be a safe and effective means of managing procedural anxiety, providing a more effective strategy than standard care. Studies with larger samples, involving different procedures and across age groups are required. Crown