ArticleJMIR human factors2024
Factors Impacting the Adoption and Potential Reimbursement of a Virtual Reality Tool for Pain Management in Switzerland: Qualitative Case Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Multicriteria Decision Analysis for Extended Reality (MCDA-XR) Governance Framework for Health Care Adoption: Mixed Methods Development Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pain and its adequate treatment are an issue in hospitals and emergency departments (EDs). A virtual reality (VR) tool to manage pain could act as a valuable complement to common pharmaceutical analgesics. While efficacy could be shown in previous studies, this does not assure clinical adoption in EDs. Objective: The main aim of this study was to investigate which factors affect the adoption and potential reimbursement of a VR tool for pain management in the ED of a Swiss university hospital. Methods: Key informant interviews were conducted using in-depth semistructured interviews with 11 participants reflecting the perspectives of all the relevant stakeholder groups, including physicians, nurses, patients, health technology providers, and health insurance and reimbursement experts. The interviews were recorded and transcribed, and the extracted data were systematically analyzed using a thematic analysis and narrative synthesis of emergent themes. A consolidated framework for eHealth adoption was used to enable a systematic investigation of the topic and help determine which adoption factors are considered as facilitators or barriers or as not particularly relevant for the tool subject of this study. Results: According to the participants, the three key facilitators are (1) organizational environment; (2) tension for change, ease of use, and demonstrability; and (3) employee engagement. Further, the three key barriers to adoption are (1) workload, (2) changes in clinical workflow and habit, and (3) reimbursement. Conclusions: This study concludes that the adoption of a VR tool for pain management in the ED of the hospital subject of this study, although benefiting from a high tension for change in pain and workload management, is highly dependent on the respective organizational environment, engagement of the clinical staff, and reimbursement considerations. While tailored incentive structures and ambassador roles could benefit initial adoption, a change in the reimbursement landscape and further investigation of the positive effects on workflow effectiveness are required to drive long-term adoption.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.