Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32081989›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2020

A randomised controlled trial to assess the feasibility of utilising virtual reality to facilitate analgesia during external cephalic version.

Vinayak Smith, Ritesh Rikain Warty, Ravi Kashyap, Peter Neil, Carol Adriaans, Amrish Nair, Sathya Krishnan, Fabricio Da Silva Costa, Beverley Vollenhoven, Euan M Wallace

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Vinayak SmithThe Ritchie Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, 252 Clayton Road, Clayton, 3168, Victoria, Australia. vinayak.smith@monash.edu.
Ritesh Rikain WartyThe Ritchie Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, 252 Clayton Road, Clayton, 3168, Victoria, Australia.
Ravi KashyapMonash Women's, Monash Health, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Monash Health, 252 Clayton Road, Clayton, 3168, Victoria, Australia.
Peter NeilMonash Women's, Monash Health, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Monash Health, 252 Clayton Road, Clayton, 3168, Victoria, Australia.
Carol AdriaansMonash Women's, Monash Health, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Monash Health, 252 Clayton Road, Clayton, 3168, Victoria, Australia.
Amrish NairBiorithm Pte. Ltd., Block 81, Ayer Rajah Crescent, Unit #03-53, 139967, Singapore, Singapore.
Sathya KrishnanWest Gippsland Health Service, Warragul, 3820, Victoria, Australia.
Fabricio Da Silva CostaThe Ritchie Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, 252 Clayton Road, Clayton, 3168, Victoria, Australia.
Beverley VollenhovenThe Ritchie Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, 252 Clayton Road, Clayton, 3168, Victoria, Australia.
Euan M WallaceThe Ritchie Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, 252 Clayton Road, Clayton, 3168, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4506-5233
Monash Medical Centre · AUBiotronik (Singapore) · SGMerck (Singapore) · SGMonash University · AUUniversidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

External cephalic version (ECV) is associated with a moderate degree of pain. Virtual reality (VR) is a technology that has shown promise in offering procedural analgesia. We undertook a clinical pilot to assess the viability of VR to reduce pain during ECV. In an open randomised controlled trial (RCT), we randomised 50 women to either VR or standard care each (25 per group). Women receiving VR were administered VR content (Skylights) via a headset. Pre- and post-procedural measures of pain, anxiety, device experience and vital signs were measured. There were no significant differences between groups (VR/no VR) in pain scores (60.68 vs 49.76; p = 0.2), ECV success rates (80% vs 76%; p = 0.7) or anxiety levels. The women receiving VR had a significantly higher anticipation of pain pre-procedurally (70.0 vs 50.0; p = 0.03). 20 (80%) of the VR women indicated that they would use VR again and 22 (88%) indicated they would recommend it to a friend having ECV. There were no significant differences between groups for side effects encountered or changes in vital signs. We have shown that using VR during ECV is feasible and appears safe. Our results inform the design of future RCTs.

Indexed as

Virtual RealityAdultAnalgesiaAnxietyComputer SimulationFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansPainPain ManagementPain MeasurementPilot ProjectsPregnancyVersion, Fetal

Identifiers

PMID32081989
PMCPMC7035335
OpenAlexW3008713727

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.