ArticleInternational neurourology journal2026
The Effect of Virtual Reality Glasses Application During Urodynamics on Procedural Pain, Anxiety, and Hemodynamic Parameters: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in International neurourology journal, 2026. 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.
- Urodynamic Study Revisited: An Evolving Tool in Functional Urology.International neurourology journal · 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
purposeTo evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality glasses (VRG) intervention during urodynamic testing (UT) on procedural pain (PP), anxiety levels, and hemodynamic parameters.
methodsThis prospective, randomized controlled trial enrolled 84 patients undergoing UT, randomized 1:1 to VRG (n=42) or control group (n=42). The VRG group viewed immersive 3-dimensional nature videos via VRG throughout the procedure, while controls received routine care. Primary outcomes included PP (visual analogue scale) and anxiety levels (State Anxiety Inventory) assessed at baseline (pre-UT1), immediately postprocedure (post-UT2), and 15 minutes postprocedure (post-UT3). Secondary outcomes comprised hemodynamic parameters (systolic blood pressure [SBP], diastolic blood pressure [DBP], heart rate [HR], respiratory rate [RR], oxygen saturation [SpO₂]) measured at identical timepoints.
resultsGroups demonstrated comparable baseline characteristics and PP scores (VRG: 2.52±2.76 vs. control: 3.07±2.99, P=0.386). While baseline anxiety levels were similar between groups, the VRG group exhibited significantly lower postprocedural anxiety scores (post-UT2: 34.64±4.98 vs. 39.21±8.11, P=0.003; post-UT3: 34.45±4.68 vs. 39.45±8.27, P=0.001). Hemodynamically, the VRG group demonstrated significantly reduced DBP at post-UT3 (73.4±9.7 mmHg vs. 78.7±12.0 mmHg, P=0.028) and lower RRs at both postprocedural timepoints (P<0.001 and P=0.015, respectively). No significant between-group differences were observed for SBP, HR, or SpO₂.
conclusionVRG intervention during UT effectively reduced postprocedural anxiety and demonstrated beneficial effects on RR and DBP, without significantly impacting PP. These findings support the use of VRG by nurses as a safe, nonpharmacological adjunct for enhancing patient comfort during invasive urological procedures.
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.