| Literature DB >> 34276254 |
Mohammad Alqudimat1,2, Giulia Mesaroli2,3, Chitra Lalloo2, Jennifer Stinson1,2,4, Clyde Matava4,5.
Abstract
Purpose of Review: This review summarizes and provides a comprehensive narrative synthesis of the current evidence on immersive technology's (i.e., virtual and augmented Reality) use for perioperative anxiety, acute, and chronic pain in pediatrics. Recent Findings: Researchers have increasingly studied immersive technology as a non-pharmacological alternative for perioperative anxiety, acute, and chronic pain management. We found several research studies published over the last 3 years: almost all studies examined the use of virtual reality for perioperative anxiety and pain; only one case report was about the use of augmented reality for preoperative anxiety. Most studies showed that virtual reality intervention is effective and safe for perioperative anxiety, acute, and chronic pain. However, the studies are heterogeneous with relatively small sample sizes. Summary: This review shows that more high-quality studies (i.e., randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes and standardized methods for measuring and reporting outcomes) are needed to examine the effectiveness and adverse effects of virtual reality intervention on perioperative anxiety, acute, and chronic pain in pediatrics.Entities:
Keywords: Augmented reality; Immersive technology; Postoperative acute and chronic pain; Preoperative anxiety; Procedural pain; Virtual reality
Year: 2021 PMID: 34276254 PMCID: PMC8277426 DOI: 10.1007/s40140-021-00472-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Curr Anesthesiol Rep ISSN: 1523-3855
Studies about the effect of immersive technology on preoperative anxiety and chronic pain
| Studies about the effect of immersive technology on preoperative anxiety | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Country | Study design | Sample size (VR/control) | Age (VR/control) | VR mechanism | Intervention | Anxiety measure | Surgery | Results |
| Ryu et al., 2017 | South Korea | RCT | 69 (34/35) | 6/6 | Exposure | Intervention: a 4-min video of a famous local avatar who give orientation about the OR Control: care as usual | mYPAS | Elective surgery | Children in the VR group had a significantly lower mYPAS score than those in the control group |
| Ryu et al., 2018 | South Korea | RCT | 69 (34/35) | 5/6 | Exposure | Intervention: a 5-min VR game reflect the preoperative experience Control: care as usual | mYPAS | Elective day surgery | Children in the VR group had a significantly lower mYPAS score than those in the control group |
| Ryu et al. 2019 | South Korea | RCT | 80 (41/39) | 6/6 | Exposure | Intervention a 4-min video of a famous local avatar who give orientation about the OR Control: care as usual | mYPAS | Elective surgery | Children in the VR group had a significantly lower mYPAS score than those in the control group |
| Dehghan et al., 2019 | Iran | RCT | 40 (20/20) | 7.35 (Mean) | Exposure | Intervention: a 5-min video to the operating room using VR (eyeglass) Control: care as usual, and parents were allowed to touch and caress their children | YPAS | Abdominal surgery | Children in the VR group had a significantly lower mYPAS score than those in the control group |
| Eijlers et al., 2019 | Netherlands | RCT | 191 (94/97) | 8.3/7.5 (mean) | Exposure | Intervention: 15-min child-friendly exposure to the operating room using VR Control: care as usual | mYPAS | Elective day surgery | No differences between groups were found |
| Park et al., 2019 | South Korea | RCT | 80 (40/40) | 6.8/7.1 (median) | Exposure | Intervention: a 4-min video of a famous local avatar that gives orientation about the OR. Parents and children watch the same video using the mirroring display Control: a 4-min video of a famous local avatar that gives orientation about the OR | mYPAS | Elective surgery | Children and parents in the VR group had a significantly lower mYPAS score than those in the control group |
| Hashimoto et al., 2020 | Japan | RCT | 58 (29/29) | 5/5 (mean) | Distraction | Intervention: video glasses was used to display the patients’ chosen movie Control: portable multimedia player | mYPAS | Elective surgery | Children in the VR group had a significantly lower mYPAS score than those in the control group |
| Jung et al., 2020 | USA | RCT | 71 (34/37) | (8.2/7.8) | Distraction | Intervention: VR audiovisual distraction with Control: care as usual | mYPAS | Elective surgery | Children in the VR group had a significantly lower mYPAS score than those in the control group |
| Gupta et al., 2019 | USA | Case study | 1 | 10 | Distraction | VR multiuser application, Oculus Rooms, patient and his mother joined each other in the multiuser virtual space and played a VR board game together. While interacting in VR, the patient and his mother were able to talk with each other and hear each other’s voices | None | Elective surgery | Child and parent described that their anxiety was low in comparison with previous preoperative anxiety |
| Vranchen et al., 2019 | Belgium | 3-phase game | 181 | 4 to 7 | NA | No intervention | None | Elective surgery | Promising game to help young children and their parents during |
| development | the preparation for admission at the hospital for elective surgery | ||||||||
| Libaw et al., 2020 | USA | Case report | 3 | 8.7 (mean) | Distraction | AR Software created by Miney Moe (San Francisco, CA) featured Jenny the Robot, encouraging patients to take deep breaths during mask induction | None | Elective surgery | Patients and parents described less patient anxiety as compared to previous inductions |
| Studies about the effect of virtual reality in pediatric chronic pain | |||||||||
| Author | Country | Study design | Sample size (VR/control) | Age (VR/control) | VR mechanism | Intervention | Measures | Pain conditions | Results |
| Won et al., 2015 | USA | Case series | 4 | 13–17 | Distraction, embodiment | 6-sessions VR where patients were tasked with kicking a balloon with their leg. Software was manipulate to exaggerate the limb movements or mirror the limb movements | Limb movements | CRPS, lower limb | Authors report the intervention was safe (no adverse events) and feasible, patient qualitative feedback was positive |
| Shiri | Israel | Cohort study | 9 | 10–17 | Biofeedback | 10-sessions VR (30 min) combined with biofeedback technology. Patients viewed an image of themselves that reflected their emotional state (using GSR data) and were tasked with relaxing their body to reduce pain | Pain intensity (VAS), QOL (PedsQL), patient satisfaction | Headache | Significant reductions in pain intensity and improvements in QOL (post-intervention and 3-month follow-up) |
| Griffin | USA | Cohort study | 17 | 7–17 | Distraction graded exposure | VR software (Fruity Feet) developed by Mighty Immersion (New York, NY) motivated children to use their limbs in rehabilitation sessions | Multiple measures including pain, function, immersion, and limb movements | Mixed | Patients reported Fruity Feet was highly engaging, felt distracted from pain, and perceived greater mobility |
mYPAS modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale (observational scale with five domains: activity, vocalization, emotional, expressivity, D: state of apparent arousal, and use of parents. The total adjusted score is calculated as (A/4 + B/6 + C/4 + D/4 + E/4) ×100/5. The score ranges from 23.3 to 100, with the higher score indicating a higher level of anxiety
YPAS Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale (observational scale with four domains: activity, vocalization, emotional expressivity, and state of apparent arousal). Each domain has four items that are scored from 1 to 4, which sum to the minimum score of 4 and the maximum score of 16
*Studies about the effect of virtual reality in pediatric acute pain are summarized in a systematic review Lambert 2020
*GSR galvanic skin response, a measure of sweat gland activity to approximate relaxation
*QOL quality of life