Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38847962›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024

Virtual reality for interventional radiology patients: a preliminary study.

Loïc Grange, Rémi Grange, Sylvain Bertholon, Stéphanie Morisson, Isabelle Martin, Claire Boutet, Sylvain Grange

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
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

7 authors.

Loïc GrangeDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital of Saint-Etienne, Saint-Priest-En-Jarez, France.
Rémi GrangeDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital of Saint-Etienne, Saint-Priest-En-Jarez, France.
Sylvain BertholonDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital of Saint-Etienne, Saint-Priest-En-Jarez, France.
Stéphanie MorissonDepartment of Supportive Care in Oncology, University Hospital of Saint Etienne, Saint-Priest-En-Jarez, France.
Isabelle MartinInfection Control Unit, University Hospital of Saint-Etienne, Saint-Priest-En-Jarez, France.
Claire BoutetDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital of Saint-Etienne, Saint-Priest-En-Jarez, France.
Sylvain GrangeDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital of Saint-Etienne, Saint-Priest-En-Jarez, France. sylvain.grange@chu-st-etienne.fr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the tolerance and feasibility of using virtual reality headsets with patients during interventional radiology procedures. MATERIAL AND

methodIn this single-center prospective study, the use of a virtual reality headset in addition to the usual analgesic and anxiolytic treatment was proposed to all patients presenting in the interventional radiology department from December 2020 to June 2022. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients with whom it was not possible to communicate (2) epileptic patients, (3) non-verbal patients, and (4) pregnant women. The main objective was to evaluate the safety of the procedure by screening complications during and after the procedure. The second objective was to evaluate feasibility, as defined by the number of patients using the helmet until the end of the procedure. Effectiveness (patient's self-evaluation of pain and anxiety), comfort, satisfaction, emotions felt, sense of security, and feeling of immersion were also evaluated. Caregivers completed a feedback questionnaire.

resultsVirtual reality headsets were offered to 100 patients, 9 of whom declined. Procedures were achieved in 93.5% of cases: 6/91 patients removed the headset before the end of the procedure. There were minor adverse events in 2/85 (2.3%) procedures (discomfort and nausea) and no major adverse events. 93.9% of patients found an overall benefit, and 90.2% would recommend virtual reality to another patient. 94.4% of caregivers were satisfied with the virtual reality equipment. The mean pain level was 2.5 ± 2.7 before the procedure, 3.3 ± 2.5 during the procedure, and 1.6 ± 2.7 after the procedure. Mean anxiety scores were 4.6 ± 2.9 before the procedure, 3.1 ± 2.7 during the procedure, and 1.1 ± 1.9 after the procedure.

conclusionThe use of virtual reality technology as a complement to traditional therapy for procedures under local anesthesia is feasible and safe in interventional radiology and can be beneficial for pain and anxiety management.

Indexed as

Feasibility StudiesVirtual RealityAdultAgedAnxietyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionProspective StudiesRadiology, InterventionalSurveys and QuestionnairesAnxietyInterventional radiologyPainVirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID38847962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.