Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37095433›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2023

Virtual Reality Experience during Labour (VIREL); a qualitative study.

A Musters, A S Vandevenne, A Franx, M M L H Wassen

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04858984 (Virtual Reality, Experience During Labour; a Qualitative Research), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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.

NCT04858984 nacompletednot on this map

Virtual Reality, Experience During Labour; a Qualitative Research

TypeinterventionalSponsorZuyderland Medisch CentrumRan2020 to 2021Enrolled28ConditionsLabor Pain, Virtual Reality, Analgesia, PainArmsVirtual Reality
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Experience of breast cancer patients participating in a virtual reality psychological rehabilitation: a qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

A MustersDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Zuyderland Medical Centre, P.O. Box 4446, Heerlen, 6401 CX, The Netherlands. a.musters@zuyderland.nl.
A S VandevenneMaastricht University, P.O. Box 616, Maastricht, 6200 MD, The Netherlands.
A FranxDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Erasmus Medical Centre, P.O. Box 2060, Rotterdam, 3000 CB, The Netherlands.
M M L H WassenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Zuyderland Medical Centre, P.O. Box 4446, Heerlen, 6401 CX, The Netherlands.
Zuyderland Medisch Centrum · NLErasmus University Rotterdam · NLMaastricht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is increasing evidence that virtual reality (VR) is effective in the reduction of labour pain. The implementation of alternative methods like VR to reduce labour pain can contribute to reduce patient request for pharmacological pain management methods and associated side effects. The aim of this study is to examine women's experiences, preferences and satisfaction in regard to the use of VR during labour.

methodsA qualitative interview study was conducted in a non-university teaching hospital in The Netherlands. Two VR applications, respectively a guided meditation and an interactive game were tested in eligible women with a singleton pregnancy, scheduled for induction of labour. For the primary outcome, patients' VR experience and application preference (meditation vs. game) were examined using a post-intervention questionnaire and a semi-structured interview. Three categories (with sub-categories) were used to guide interviews: "The VR experience", "Pain reduction", and "Usability of the VR application". Labour pain before and directly after VR was evaluated using the NRS score.

resultsTwenty-four women, of whom 14 were nulliparous and ten multiparous, were included and 12 of these women participated in semi-structured interviews. Using within-subject paired t-test comparisons, compared to pain pre-VR, patients reported a highly significant 26% decrease in mean NRS scores during VR meditation (pain pre-VR = 6.71 + - 1.65 vs. pain after VR = 4.96 + - 2.01) [p < 0.001]. Compared to pain before VR game, patients also reported a highly significant 19% decrease in mean NRS scores during VR game (pain before VR game = 6.89 + - 1.88 vs. pain after VR game = 5.61 + - 2.23) [p = 0.001].

conclusionAll women were highly satisfied with VR use during labour. Patients reported a highly significant reduction in pain during the interactive VR game and during meditation, patients preferred guided meditation. These results can contribute to the development of a potential promising new non-pharmacological tool to reduce labour pain.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04858984, date of registration: 26/04/2021 (retrospectively registered).

Indexed as

Labor, ObstetricLabor PainVirtual RealityFemaleHumansPain ManagementPain MeasurementPregnancyAnalgesiaLabourObstetric carePainVirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID37095433
PMCPMC10123587
OpenAlexW4366830169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.