Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39910674›Full record

Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2025

Effect of an intensive care unit virtual reality intervention on relatives´ mental health distress: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial.

Denzel L Q Drop, Johan H Vlake, Evert-Jan Wils, Jasper Van Bommel, Christian Jung, Denise E Hilling, O Joseph Bienvenu, Tim I M Korevaar, Anna F C Schut, Margo M C van Mol and 2 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Family Support Strategies During Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. 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

12 authors.

Denzel L Q DropDepartment of Adult Intensive Care, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-8825-180X
Johan H VlakeDepartment of Adult Intensive Care, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0532-0252
Evert-Jan WilsDepartment of Intensive Care, Franciscus Gasthuis and Vlietland, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2868-0920
Jasper Van BommelDepartment of Adult Intensive Care, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8408-0500
Christian JungMedical Faculty and University Hospital of Düsseldorf, Cardiovascular Research Institute Düsseldorf (CARID), Heinrich-Heine University Düsseldorf, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8325-250X
Denise E HillingDepartment of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5875-6164
O Joseph BienvenuDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8466-102X
Tim I M KorevaarDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Vascular Medicine and Pharmacology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7961-8791
Anna F C SchutDepartment of Intensive Care, Ikazia Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9881-6793
Margo M C van MolDepartment of Adult Intensive Care, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0213-6054
Diederik GommersDepartment of Adult Intensive Care, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6808-7702
Michel E van GenderenDepartment of Adult Intensive Care, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. m.vangenderen@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5668-3435

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRelatives of intensive care unit (ICU) patients often endure symptoms of post-traumatic stress, anxiety, and depression during and after treatment of a family member's hospitalization. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of ICU-specific virtual reality (ICU-VR) on mental health among relatives, 6 months after patient's ICU discharge.

methodsThis multicenter, randomized controlled trial included relatives of ICU patients who were assigned to receive either standard care or standard care plus ICU-VR, by randomizing the ICU patients. Relatives were assessed up to 6 months after patient discharge from the ICU for post-traumatic stress, anxiety, depression, quality of life, relatives' understanding of ICU care, and appreciation of ICU-VR.

resultsOne hundred relatives of 81 patients and 89 relatives of 80 patients were randomized to the intervention and control groups, respectively. Relatives' median age was 48 years and 53% were female. Compared to the control group, relatives who received ICU-VR did not experience a decrease in post-traumatic stress (23% vs. 18%; p = 0.99), anxiety (22% vs. 30%; p = 0.35), or depression (17% vs. 23%; p = 0.44). There was no significant difference between median mental quality of life (50.2 vs. 52.6; p = 0.51), physical quality of life (56.1 vs. 54.3; p = 0.16), or understanding of ICU care between groups. Patients in the intervention group highly endorsed ICU-VR (90%), favoring it over traditional informational brochures and the majority (82%) stated it improved their understanding of ICU treatment.

conclusionICU-VR did not significantly improve mental health distress symptoms among relatives 6-months after a patient's discharge. Relatives highly endorsed ICU-VR and self-reported that it improved their understanding of ICU treatment.

Indexed as

FamilyStress, PsychologicalVirtual RealityAdultAgedAnxietyDepressionFemaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsQuality of LifeStress Disorders, Post-TraumaticSurveys and QuestionnairesIntensive careMental healthPost-intensive Care syndromeQuality of lifeVirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID39910674
PMCPMC11796184

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.