Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40524996›Full record

ReviewCureus2025

Virtual Reality for the Improvement of Perioperative Care in Otorhinolaryngology-Related Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Ali Alseneid, Marwan Ibrahim, Alhassen Alseneid, Punsiri Silva

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

4 authors.

Ali AlseneidEar, Nose and Throat (ENT), University of Buckingham Medical School at Milton Keynes University Hospital, Milton Keynes, GBR.
Marwan IbrahimEar, Nose and Throat (ENT), University of Buckingham Medical School at Milton Keynes University Hospital, Milton Keynes, GBR.
Alhassen AlseneidEar, Nose and Throat (ENT), University of Buckingham Medical School at Milton Keynes University Hospital, Milton Keynes, GBR.
Punsiri SilvaEar, Nose and Throat (ENT) Head, Neck and Thyroid Surgeon, Milton Keynes University Hospital, Milton Keynes, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Virtual reality (VR) has emerged as a promising non-pharmacological adjunct for perioperative care, offering potential benefits in alleviating symptoms such as postoperative pain and reducing anxiety. However, its use in otorhinolaryngology (Ear, Nose and Throat (ENT)) surgical settings remains insufficiently explored. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of VR interventions compared to standard care across key perioperative outcomes in ENT and head and neck surgery. This review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO. Comprehensive searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to April 2025. Studies were eligible if they compared VR interventions to control groups in ENT perioperative settings. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools, and data synthesis was performed using a random-effects meta-analysis. A total of nine studies involving 527 participants were included. The postoperative pain scores demonstrated a statistically significant modest reduction, favoring VR (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.41; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.78 to -0.05), with low heterogeneity (I² = 16.2%). A subgroup analysis for postoperative pain scores indicated a larger effect in pediatric populations (SMD = -0.59; 95% CI -3.70 to 2.51) compared to adults (SMD = -0.38; 95% CI -0.99 to 0.23), although neither subgroup reached statistical significance. A sensitivity analysis was also conducted for the postoperative pain scores which strengthened the findings (SMD = -0.47; 95% CI -0.80 to -0.13), and showed no observed heterogeneity (I² = 0%). For perioperative anxiety, VR interventions offered a slight reduction compared to standard care (SMD = -0.85; 95% CI -1.88 to 0.18), though this did not reach statistical significance. Patient satisfaction scores showed a small but statistically significant improvement (SMD = 0.32; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.59), with no observed heterogeneity. Although opioid outcomes could not be included in the meta-analysis due to reporting variability, narrative synthesis of three studies suggested consistent opioid-sparing effects. VR-related adverse events were rare, and dropout rates were minimal, reinforcing its safety and feasibility in ENT perioperative care. These findings support virtual reality as a feasible and well-tolerated adjunct to perioperative ENT care, particularly for improving pain and patient satisfaction. Anxiety outcomes showed a non-significant trend toward benefit, and opioid reducing effects appear promising but remain inconclusive. Larger, standardized trials with longer follow-up are needed to confirm VR's effectiveness in this setting.

Indexed as

head and neck surgeryimmersive technologiesotorhinolaryngologypain managementperioperative caresystematic review and meta-analysisvirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID40524996
PMCPMC12168674

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.