ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2026
Virtual reality for pain and anxiety reduction during venous puncture procedures : A within-subject clinical crossover study.
Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVenous puncture is a routine procedure in extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) and may be associated with pain and anxiety. Virtual reality (VR) distraction has been shown to reduce distress in pediatric and acute settings. This study investigated if immersive VR can reduce pain and anxiety during venous puncture in ECP patients.
methodsA prospective, single-center clinical study with a within-subject crossover design was conducted at the University Hospital Innsbruck. A total of 21 adult patients underwent 2 consecutive ECP sessions, first with standard care and then with immersive VR distraction. Subjective pain and anxiety were assessed using numerical rating scales (NRS). The physiological parameters heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV), respiratory rate (RR) and galvanic skin response were continuously monitored.
resultsThe NRS pain scores were significantly lower with VR compared to standard care with a median of 1.00 (interquartile range, IQR 0.00-2.00) in both conditions (p = 0.031). Without vs. with VR, 23.8% vs. 4.8% of patients rated their pain > 2 during puncture. The NRS anxiety scores were not significantly reduced with a median of 0.00 (0.00-1.00) without VR vs. 0.00 (0.00-0.00) with VR (p = 0.066). Without vs. with VR, 23.8% vs. 14.3% of patients rated their anxiety > 1 during puncture and 48% of patients preferred VR for future treatment, while 38% preferred standard care.
conclusionThe findings support the feasibility and potential benefit of VR as a supportive, nonpharmacological intervention, regarding pain reduction. Larger trials in more diverse patient populations are warranted to confirm these results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42101630What 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.