Trial reportNeuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater2025
Examining the safety and side effects of exposure therapy in virtual reality for patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Trial report in Neuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Exposure and response prevention therapy in virtual reality (VERP) for patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) has been investigated primarily for its effectiveness. This study evaluated an important research gap, the negative and positive side effects of VERP and its safety. Eighty outpatients with contamination- or checking-related OCD were randomized to two conditions: VERP (six weekly sessions) or care as usual (CAU). Assessments were conducted at baseline (t0), 6 weeks after t0 (t1), and 3 months after t1 (t2). General side effects (Negative and Positive Side Effects Questionnaire; NPSE) and those specific to virtual reality (VERP-Specific Side Effects Questionnaire; VEQ) were assessed at t1. Cybersickness (Simulator Sickness Questionnaire; SSQ) was assessed before and after each session. The safety evaluation involved assessing the worsening of OC-symptoms (Reliable Change Index of the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale; Y‑BOCS) from t0 to t1 and serious adverse events during the intervention. Results indicated no significant clinical symptom deterioration in the VERP group and no adverse events. In total, 47% of participants in both groups experienced at least one side effect, with significantly fewer reported in the VERP than in the CAU group (p < 0.001). Concerning VERP-specific side effects, at least one side effect was found in 55% of the patients. The SSQ total score did not significantly change from before to after the VERP sessions (p = 0.098, Cohen's d = 0.297). In conclusion, VERP was safe and demonstrated few side effects, highlighting its potential as a well-tolerated and safe intervention for patients with OCD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40117073What 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.