ArticleJournal of clinical nursing2026
Virtual Reality for Managing Procedural Pain and Distress in Paediatrics: A Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of clinical nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness and Safety of Virtual Reality Interventions for Symptom Management in Adults Undergoing Hemodialysis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Immersive Virtual Reality for Pediatric Procedural Pain and Anxiety: A Structured Narrative Review and Developmentally Informed Framework for Clinical Matching and AI-Supported Personalization.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Review
- Review of paediatric pharmacological and non-pharmacological procedural comfort strategies.BMJ paediatrics open · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProcedural pain and distress in children can result in severe short- and long-term consequences, including post-traumatic stress syndrome and needle phobia. While distraction techniques (e.g., toys, music) have been widely used, virtual reality (VR) offers a novel, immersive form of distraction. Despite the rapid development of VR technologies, there is a lack of comprehensive evidence regarding which paediatric patients and procedures benefit most from VR interventions.
methodsWe conducted a scoping review following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A systematic search across PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Chinese databases (CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, SinoMed) identified studies from January 1, 2000 to November 15, 2025. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-experimental designs assessing VR for pain/anxiety management during medical procedures in paediatric patients, with outcomes including pain intensity, distress, feasibility, satisfaction or safety.
resultsOf the 5458 original database citations, 201 were eligible for full-text evaluation. Of these articles, a total of 22 were included in the scoping review. RCTs comprised 81.8% (n = 18). The majority (86.4%) employed immersive VR and 27.3% utilized cost-effective smartphone-based systems. Procedures targeted included venipuncture, needle-related interventions, intravenous access, surgery and burn wound care. Approximately 86.4% of studies reported VR's superiority over standard care in reducing procedural pain and distress.
conclusionVR is an effective, non-pharmacological tool for managing procedural pain and distress in paediatric clinical settings, showing promise for integration into routine care. However, existing studies exhibit methodological heterogeneity and focus primarily on short-term outcomes. Future research should prioritize large-scale, rigorously designed RCTs with long-term follow-up, and focus on developing standardized, evidence-based VR protocols for diverse paediatric populations. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution was required for this scoping review, as it only synthesized existing published literature without primary data collection.
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.