ArticleJournal of caring sciences2024
The Effectiveness of Virtual Reality Application for Women Undergoing Episiotomy Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of caring sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Virtual reality (VR) is effective in several healthcare domains. As of date, there have been no systematic reviews investigating the efficacy of VR technology in episiotomy repair in women. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effects of using VR on pain, anxiety and satisfaction in women under episiotomy repair. Methods: For the original articles, six databases were searched using relevant keywords without restriction on time or languages until June 6, 2024. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB) and the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized Studies (RoBANS) were both used to assess the risk of bias in randomized and non-randomized studies, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) also determined the quality of our evidence. All analyses employed Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) V.2. Results: Five randomized clinical trial and two quasi-experimental studies with poor-to high-quality met the inclusion criteria. The VR significantly decreased perineal pain during [MD (95% CI)=-1.622 (-2.598, -0.645), Conclusion: Given the efficacy of VR on pain, anxiety, and satisfaction, it is suggested that it be utilized as a novel modality to enhance the quality of maternity hospital care.
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.