Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39845596›Full record

ReviewSurgery in practice and science2022

Does virtual reality in the perioperative setting for patient education improve understanding? A scoping review.

Talia Shepherd, Matthew Trinder, Mary Theophilus

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Surgery in practice and science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. 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

3 authors.

Talia ShepherdGeneral Surgery Department, SJOG Midland Public and Private Hospital, 1 Clayton St, Midland, Western Australia 6056, Australia.
Matthew TrinderGeneral Surgery Department, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Hospital Ave, Nedlands, Western Australia 6009, Australia.
Mary TheophilusGeneral Surgery Department, SJOG Midland Public and Private Hospital, 1 Clayton St, Midland, Western Australia 6056, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The potential uses of Virtual Reality (VR) to educate patients perioperatively are now an emerging field of research. The objective of this scoping review is to assess the extent of the literature on how immersive VR is being used perioperatively to specifically improve patient understanding of their pathology or procedure. Methods: A systematic search was carried out with inclusion criteria; adults (≥18 years old); use of immersive VR; perioperative setting for patient education. Results: Twelve studies were reviewed, the majority of which were unpowered, non-randomised experimental trials. VR was mainly used during procedure consent to show patients a 3D anatomical model of the relevant anatomy. Subjective and objective patient understanding was improved after exposure to VR. Conclusions: Continuing advances in VR technology will make this option more accessible to health care settings in the future and further research in this arena should prioritise statistically powered, high quality study design.

Indexed as

Head-mountedPatient understandingPerioperativeVirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID39845596
PMCPMC11749402

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.