ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Effects of Virtual Reality on Adults Diagnosed with Chronic Non-Specific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of Tai Chi on pain, functional dysfunction, and sleep in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Mind over pain: VR-based hypnotherapy for chronic non-specific low back pain - a randomised controlled trial.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Trial
- Bioengineering Support in the Assessment and Rehabilitation of Low Back Pain.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Mixed pain: clinical practice recommendations.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
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
BACKGROUND/
objectivesNon-specific low back pain represents a high number of primary care consultations, generating a great social and economic cost. There is a higher prevalence in women, and it may be associated with multiple factors. One of the most innovative tools in rehabilitation is virtual reality-based therapy. Virtual reality positively affects the motivation of participants and generates greater adherence to treatment, so this factor could lead to long-term functional improvement. The objective of this review is to update the effectiveness of virtual reality programs on pain, disability, kinesiophobia, and changes in the thoracoabdominal musculature in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. METHODOLOGY: PubMed, PEDro, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were used in this systematic review. The research question was formulated using PICOS. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale was used. Inclusion criteria were randomized clinical trials, participants were men and/or women over 18 years of age who were diagnosed with chronic non-specific low back pain, and articles that included virtual reality as a treatment. Articles with a level of evidence lower than 5/10 on the PEDro scale were excluded.
resultsA total of 14 studies were included with sample sizes between 34 and 188 participants. Studies showed significant improvements in pain reduction, kinesiophobia, and disability (inflammation and motor control). Some studies showed long-term benefits, with effects maintained up to 18 months post-intervention, especially in the reduction in pain and its interference with daily activities.
conclusionsThe findings of this systematic review support the efficacy of virtual reality as an effective and safe therapeutic option for the treatment of chronic non-specific low back pain.
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.