ReviewInnovations in clinical neuroscience
Virtual Reality as a Nonpharmacological Tool for Acute Pain Management: A Scoping Review.
Review in Innovations in clinical neuroscience. 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.
- Virtual Reality Induced Awe in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Mixed-Methods Study.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute pain (AP) is a prevalent symptom in hospital settings, affecting up to 84 percent of the patients seeking healthcare services. It significantly impacts an individual's quality of life, with inadequate management resulting in slower recovery, increased cost of care, and a greater risk of developing chronic pain. While pharmacological approaches are effective, they are associated with numerous side effects, including nausea, addiction, and the possibility of fatal overdoses. Given this, virtual reality (VR) offers an innovative avenue to manage AP effectively while minimizing the effects of drugs. Objectives: This study aims to map the extent of literature on utilizing VR as a tool for the nonpharmacological management of AP. Specifically, this review attempts to understand the characteristics of the populations using VR for AP management, the technical specifications and mechanisms used to alleviate AP, and the overall effectiveness of VR in managing AP. Methods: A scoping review was conducted to identify literature from the following electronic databases: PubMed, ScienceDirect, ERIC, and Google Scholar. To be included in this review, articles had to focus on AP in both adult and pediatric populations and address AP using VR in any clinical or care setting. The search was limited to peer-reviewed, English-language, quantitative research articles published between 2000 and 2024. Results: A total of 97 studies were identified. Sixty-six percent of studies demonstrated the efficacy of VR as an analgesic, outperforming traditional nonpharmacological approaches (eg, standard of care, mobile phones). Distraction was the most effective VR mechanism for pain management, showing efficacy in 86.9 percent of studies. The most common focus was on needle-related pain (30.9%), followed by dental and perioperative pain (15.5% each). VR was most effective in wound care (87.5%), followed by labor-related (83.33%) and dental (80%) pain. Conclusion: VR is a promising tool for managing AP, offering considerable benefits in terms of patient care, patient experience, and reduction in drug-related side effects. The high efficacy rates for wound care, labor-related pain, and dental pain highlight the potential for VR to be integrated into standard pain management protocols. However, further research, with rigorous research design, is required to standardize VR interventions and optimize their effectiveness across different patient populations and pain contexts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40213121PMC11980906What 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.